[MD] Trance state

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Ham

20 Nov. you wrote:

[Ham previously]:
> > > If we lived in a moral universe, there would be no need for value
> > > preferences or morality systems, and life would be meaningless.

 [Bodvar]:
> > Ham is correct here too, but this requires a little clearing up. To
> > say that reality IS something is meaningless, even more so is the
> > assertion that it can be split and remain, and it's here things goes
> > wrong. Pirsig says that SOM splits reality S/O while it postulates
> > one subjective and one objective reality. Likewise the MOQ
> > postulates one Dynamic reality and one Static reality the Quality
> > lies in this classification and makes them DQ/SQ. [snip] Despite
> > Ham's peculiar phrasing he is right. Humans is a biological speciedisappears
> > that - first - rose to the social level and then (necessarily
> > because they were the sole social level "inhabitants") rose to the
> > intellectual level. But NB! it wasn't biological "man" who rose to
> > intellect but "social man".

[Ham now] 
> Bo, you wield a lot of influence here, despite your controversy with
> Pirsig's thesis.  As a fellow renegade with an "alternate view", I'm
> allied with your cause.  Indeed, I'd like to cement that alliance. 

Alliances emerges and disappears in this forum faster than in pre-
WW1 Europe ;-) To Pirsig the Quality=Reality was the overwhelming 
"fact" and the MOQ secondary, I claim that nothing is manifest before 
the dynamic/static split, that's my only controversy.     

> But the problem I have with your anthropological man "rising to the
> intellectual level", thereby recognizing SOM which prevents him from
> understanding "Dynamic Reality", doesn't make sense to me.  Why do you
> insist that Intellect is some "brass ring" to be grabbed by an
> evolving species, rather than an inherent capability of the human
> being? 

THis is the old "bone". You consider Man (we allow a bit political 
incorrectness) as existence's rock bottom (why I compare you with 
Phaedrus) I understand you perfectly. To say that there's anything 
outside Man is futile, but therefore it must be suspended   ......OR a 
Man metaphysics (MOM) constructed in the same manner as the 
MOQ with the same Absolute/Differentiated  divide and differentiated 
levels.          

> Was it not intellect (on man's part) that enabled him to
> theorize a value-centered reality?  I find it incredible that anyone
> can consider intellect an impediment to metaphysical understanding.

Right, this point is watertight from the premises of Man gazing out on a 
World that he  theorize about. This is SOM and its "intellect" is the 
theorizing. But MOQ's intellectual LEVEL is the VALUE of this 
Man/World distinction. Because it isn't indigenous to existence, there 
was a time before it (social) that didn't know it, and a biological level 
before it that even less ...etc. (these levels constitute our existence, 
but I speak about the time when they were leading edge)  

> Call me a contrarion, but it seems to me that it's this 'levels
> hierarchy' foisted on us by Pirsig, not intellectuality or SOM, that
> has stultified our intuitive thought. 
 
Once the above is grasped, namely that the Man/World dichotomy is a 
static stage that we are hypnotized by into believing is how reality 
really IS, after that cales fall ..etc.   

I have read the rest, but this is the crux and without settling it we just 
talk past each other.

Bo