[MD] MOQ Levels

[Ham Priday]

Greetings, Jorge --


> Commenting on my Post on continuity of MOQ levels
> (as opposed to discrete, not continuous) Steve writes:
>
> "I think this project of putting the levels on a
> continuum is doomed from the start because the levels
> to my thinking are categorical rather than scalar."
>
> Steve, if your thinking is correct and MOQ levels are
> categorical, as opposed to scalar, why to call them
> Levels in the first place?

Your point is well taken.  Why, indeed, call them "levels"?  Intellection is 
not a level; it is a function of the human mind.  Society is not a level; it 
is the organization of individuals with  disparate values within a common 
culture.  Biology is not a level; it is the intellectual pursuit of 
knowledge about the development and classification of organic life forms. 
Inorganic matter is not a level; it comprises the forces, elements, and 
processes of the physical world.  To define or categorize different 
approaches to factual knowledge is basic to intellectual understanding and 
human progress.

What you must understand, Jorge, is that the levels hierarchy is viewed as a 
"power struggle" by MOQ's author, and it is fundamental to his philosophy. 
Man has no significance in this cosmic hierarchy: he is only an "abstracted 
pattern".  The concept of individual freedom, like intellection, is 
considered a myth in this ontology, a throwback to S/O distinctions which 
Pirsig has supposedly overcome.  The levels of this euphemistic hierarchy 
are not scalar, they are not even interactive; they are a tetrology of 
discrete powers or forces from which the "patterns" of existence are derived 
and by which all entities evolve from the lowest (inorganic) to the highest 
(intellectual) level.

I have given up in my attempts to introduce a relational universe derived 
from a primary source to this forum.  Such a concept goes against the grain 
of the MoQists who see it as a regression to Cartesian dualism with 
"theistic overtones".  So, while I can sympathize with anyone with the 
temerity to question the rigidity of the levels hierarchy, I know that any 
such challenge will be viewed as unenlightened or "misinformed" and met with 
a barrage of  "Pirsig says" quotes.

This is not to discourage you as a newcomer to the DM, as there are a few 
individuals here who will be receptive to new ideas and even criticisms of 
the "official dogma".  My caveat applies only to the MOQ fundamentals, and 
you may well gain (as I have) from discussions of related issues that are 
not seen as central to the levels hierarchy.  In any case, your views are 
interesting, and I hope you enjoy your participation in this forum.

Essentially yours,
Ham