[MD] A fine mess

[skutvik at online.no]

Bo calling Ham.

9 Dec. you referred to my definition of the intellectual level:

> > I understand it as THE VALUE OF THE
> > SUBJECT/OBJECT DISTINCTION.

and said: 
> This has a certain ring of truth to it, as does its corollary
> principle, which you've previously stated as: "Intellect is the Value
> of the S/O divide."  It's what got me interested in your SOL thesis a
> couple of years ago.  This concept works as a metaphysical principle
> much better than the Quality hierarchy.  The problem I have with it is
> a semantic one.

"Ring of the truth" yes, I hope, but FYI it does not represent any 
metaphysical principle different from the MOQ,  
 
> The term "intellect", which is a carry-over from Pirsig's fourth
> level, is most commonly understood to mean "the capacity for rational
> or intelligent thought."  It seems that you are using it to mean
> "awareness" -- "the power of knowing", which is a less common
> understanding on the word.  

Right, the term "intellect" means the capacity for rational thought 
(intelligent is superfluous) but then what is rational thought?  

For example the "Oxford Advanced " dictionary" 

    "The power of mind to reason contrasted with feeling and 
    instinct"  

Omitting "power of mind (which is the same as "the capacity for) 
leaves  feeling (emotion) which  is the essence  of SUBJECTIVISM 
and reason the ditto of OBJECTIVISM, thus intellect is the capacity to 
distinguish between these two. The confusion stems from the said 
"power of ..." and/or "the capacity for ..." which has become intellect 
itself. 

As I say in my SOL essay: 

    WHAT SCREWS IT ALL UP IS THE NOTION OF A SUBJECT 
    DOING THE INTELLECTUALIZATION, WHILE IT IS 
    INTELLECT THAT DOES THE SUBJECT/OBJECT-
    IVIZATION.   

One could simply call the 4th. level "objectivity" but this term 
immediately invokes subjectivity, and as the 4th. level is out of the 3rd. 
it makes it look as if the social level is "subjective" but that's not right. 
Subjective is part and parcel of intellect's structure, hence the S/O 
distinction or aggregate. These deliberations for internal use, I know 
you don't "buy" the level scheme.   

You wrote more interesting things but I limit it to the intellectual (term) 
issue..

Bo