[MD] patterns revisited

Mon Oct 20 07:15:06 PDT 2008

At 08:39 AM 10/20/2008, you wrote:

>Marsha:
>I thinking the levels are categories of patterns:  inorganic,
>biological, social and intellectual.  My idea is that all patterns
>are conceptual, but are referring to something.
>
>woods:
>     I'm going to try to go through this slowly so I don't get
>mixed up.
>    First, are you talking about the patterns of inorganic, biological,
>social, and intellectual here or are you talking about the intellectual
>patterns in which categorized inorganic, biological, social, and
>intellectual?  I see a difference.

SA,

The first type, patterns.  The static pattern of value that is 
tree.  Or the static pattern of value that is Socialism.  I am 
talking about the patterns, the static patterns of value.

>Marsha:
>In the case of inorganic and biological, these patterns have as 
>their referent
>external, natural phenomenon, such as what you are calling trees, or
>as I might be calling granite.  Social and intellectual patterns are
>conceptual patterns pointing to concepts/ideas, such as Socialism and
>theoretical mathematics.
>Try this.  If you strip away all concepts(name, definition,
>attributes, etc.(all concepts)) from a tree, what is left?  Pure,
>direct experience (value, quality).
>
>The value that the static pattern of value represents is not a
>tree.
>
>woods:
>     I really don't get this last sentence.  A tree is not an 
> organic spov?  Is that
>what your saying?

The static pattern of value that represents tree is what humans 
overlay onto the direct experience.  That spov would include all that 
one knows about trees and all past experiences of trees.  Nature 
doesn't name, visualize or define trees.  The eye and seeing 
mechanism doesn't name or define trees.  The mind does.

The spov is overlayed onto the experience.  It is not the direct experience.

The tree-static-pattern-of-value is categorized as organic and 
therefore goes into the Organic/Biological Level.

>Marsha:
>A tree is not a thing.  It is a process without  a name,
>boundaries, or a beginning and end.  It is for human convenience that
>we isolate and assign concepts to processes.
>
>
>woods:
>     It is for human convenience that we assign an intellectual spov 
> of a tree, but
>the biological spov tree remains.

At the moment I am staying away from Intellectual spovs.   For me, 
it's best to start with the most simple.  That would be the first two 
levels.  Okay?  And the first two levels have as their referent 
external, natural phenomenon, such as what you are calling tree, or 
as I might be calling granite.

>Marsha:
>Pure direct experience seems to be the senses and
>emotion/feeling.  The third value distinct from mental and physical
>is the emotion value: fear, beauty, etc.
>
>
>woods:
>      I don't think value is only emotion.  I thought value had four 
> levels.  Inorganic,
>organic, social, and intellectual and then dynamic value and then 
>another called
>value (or quality).
>      I don't think pure direct experience is narrowed into senses 
> and emotion/feeling only.
>Those are biological spov's.  I thought direct experience was value, 
>thus, the direct experience
>of each level is present.  Each spov of each level has their own 
>direct experience.

A pattern seems to have an emotional aspect, sometimes strong, 
sometimes subtle.

SA, I am investigating the nature of individual patterns such as 
tree.  Of course, it can get very, very complicated, especially since 
I think everything is ever-changing, interrelated and overlapping.  I 
am curious...  I am curious about simple spovs such as tree or 
granite.  Curious to see what it might add to my understanding of the 
MOQ, what it might add to my understanding of the Intellectual 
Level.  Just wanting to investigate where it might lead.  I am not 
wanting to make anything static, just to look to see what might be 
there to assist understanding.

>Marsha:
>     Static patterns seem to carry a memory of emotions/feelings.  This
>might be carried as body intelligence.  They don't seem to be in the head.
>What do you think?
>Am I sounding like a nutcase?
>
>     woods:
>     Not a nutcase.  Searching through we both are.  These static 
> patterns that you
>are referring to here are organic spov's.  I wouldn't say just 
>"Static patterns".

Yes, you are right.  I'm talking about simple patterns first.  But I 
know for a fact that I can be in love with a logical idea such as 
Nagarjuna's use of tetralemma, and love is an emotion.

My most basic question at the moment is:  Are all patterns across all 
levels primarily conceptual?  My answer, at the moment, seems to be 
YES, but I strongly suspect there is also an emotional aspect.

And there is the question what does 'conceptual' cover?  It not a 
page from an encyclopedia.

Marsha

> >a re here too:
> >
> >ZMM (Chapter 25):
> >"This inner peace of mind
> >occurs on three levels of understanding.
> >Physical quietness seems the easiest
> >to achieve, although there are
> >levels and levels of this too, as attested by
> >the ability of Hindu
> >mystics to live buried alive for many days. Mental
> >quietness, in
> >which one has no wandering thoughts at all, seems more difficult,
> >but can be achieved. But value quietness, in which one has no
> >wandering desires
> >at all but simply performs the acts of his life
> >without desire, that seems the
> >hardest."
> >
> >woods continues:
> >     I'm particularly noticing that mental or thoughts, concepts are one
> >way of understanding, at least in accord with this excerpt from ZMM.
> >Values, including intellectual static pattern of values, are something
> >distinct from only thoughts or concepts.  Thoughts and concepts are
> >intellectual values, but mental quietness is another value of intellect.
> >Also, all the other static patterns of value:  inorganic, organic,
> >social, thereby
> >are not intellectual static pattern of value (spov).  These are
> >values, not mental.  Up
> >above Pirsig is pointing out physical, mental, and a distinct third level of
> >understanding called value.
> >
> >
> >woods
> >
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> >http://mail.yahoo.com
> >Moq_Discuss mailing list
> >Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> >http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> >Archives:
> >http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> >http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
>..
>..
>The Universe is uncaused, like a net of jewels in which each is a
>reflection of all the others in a fantastic, interrelated harmony without end.
>..
>..
>
>
>Moq_Discuss mailing list
>Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>Archives:
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>Moq_Discuss mailing list
>Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>Archives:
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

.
.
The Universe is uncaused, like a net of jewels in which each is a 
reflection of all the others in a fantastic, interrelated harmony without end.
.
.