[MD] The SOM/MOQ discrepancy.

[Platt Holden]

Hi Ron,
 
> I think "being" a collection of patterns, of intersecting fields of force,
> is a fairly accurate and aesthetically pleasing concept. It can be
> interpreted
> many meaningful ways.

Not sure what you mean by "intersecting fields of force" unless you are 
describing the ongoing struggle for dominance between the levels. For 
example, social level values would love to make robots of us all, like the 
forces that dominate China that Andre describes so eloquently.   
 
> The singular/pluralism paradox is an ancient one. Platos
> "Parmenides" is a fine dialog on the subject.
> 
> When I read it, I came to the conclusion that it was
> an argument of semantics, Pragmatically the singular
> and the plural are one experience. The meaning lies
> in the argument from the particular experience to
> a universal understanding.

I assume you are referring to the dualities of whole/parts, one/many. We 
split unitary experience for value reasons. We divide to survive. Thinking, 
necessary for human survival, took a giant leap forward when it discovered 
the value of abstracting universals from particular experiences, ideas like 
that of a flock consisting of a number of individual geese. Then came 
another leap when thinking divorced symbols from particular things, 
resulting in ideas like a heaven and theories such as  multiverses.     

> The particular experience dies, the universal understanding
> is lasting. Universal ideals get passed from generation to generation
> therefore are eternal and their craft is of the utmost concern.
> The early Christian church fathers are one and the same as 
> the ancient Greek philosophers and they crafted universal ideals
> from Platos theory of forms.

The nice thing about Pirsig's universal Quality is that it takes many 
forms.

> The ideal of the soul is the ideal of the self. Which brings us back
> to the paradox of how may the self be many yet one? how is it
> dynamic yet static? How do we all understand a meaning yet not?
> When the self is realized universally it becomes eternal, the particular
> experience is ever changing composed of many, all in flux. 
> It is the word, the logos the common understanding which 
> is the fixed and everlasting life. We then have two selves
> the fixed universal and the ever changing and perishable
> particular experience. Pirsig states they are one static
> experience.

The individual self represents universal life coincident with 
particularity. Similarly, the individual self represents universal 
consciousness coincident with a particular consciousness. I think of the 
one, the universal, as light. In the words of Azis Nasafi:

"On the death of any living creature the spirit returns to the spiritual 
world, the body to the bodily world. In this, however, only the body is 
subject to change. The spiritual world is one single spirit who stands like 
unto light behind the bodily world and who, when any single creature comes 
into being, shines through it as through a window. According to the kind 
and size of the window less or more light enters the world. The light 
itself, however, remains unchanged."    
 
> It is of my opinion that the sum is greater than the parts
> that the horse and the cart make three, that the father and the son
> create the holy ghost. the spirit of the universal understanding.
> that ideal being the good, Quality, Arete, excellence.
> Conceptualizing the good and universalizing it
> separated western civilisation from good.
> Salvation comes from the marriage of the particular good
> and the universal good. When dynamic and static are one
> experience and harmonize, it manifests as a true ideal of
> Quality, the good.

Yes. The experience of Dynamic Quality occurs when one is suddenly released 
from the tyranny of the separate-self sense.

> The original christian movement was a Quality movement but it became
> dominated by the universal good once again and once again western
> civilazation became seperated.

Not sure about that. Christianity become dominated by static patterns and  
authoritarian types of people.  
 
> So yes Platt, I think the universal ideal of the self IS larger and longer
> lasting
> than the individual expereince but it is the union and harmonization
> that completes us and give our lives a richer meaning.

I think we're on the same page. 

Platt