[MD] differences between MoQ and SOM

[MarshaV]

At 03:03 AM 10/22/2008, you wrote:
>Marsha
>
>19 Oct. :
>
>Marsha originally:
>
> > > > What is the nature of a pattern in the Inorganic Level?
>
>Bo
> > >Inorganic patterns of value is the first stage of the static
> > >hierarchy. This stage loosely corresponds to SOM's "nature" but the
> > >comparison must not be taken too literally because it does not simply
> > >mean "matter" but includes the forces (that in SOM are immaterial)
> > >and fields ... whatever.
>
> > >Pirsig's about MOQ's level arrangement not being new is a little
> > >misleading as it really don't match at all  - MOQ and SOM are worlds
> > >apart - but more about this later if you want to pursue this subject.
>
>Marsha now:
> > I'd be most grateful to have someone go through this with me.
>
> > My question is not so much what does an inorganic spov represent, but
> > what is the nature of a spov in the Inorganic Level.  My thinking is
> > that it is primarily conceptual (although it has an emotional
> > component).  As a pattern of value is conceptual, it has as its
> > referent inorganic phenomena.
>
>The MOQ starts by rejecting SOM's subject/object divide as reality's
>basic split (in favor of its own dynamic/static one) thus there is no
>conceptual as contrasted to "real" (inorganic static patterns in this
>case) at least when we see things from MOQ's dynamic position
>outside its static hierarchy.

Yes, and I reject the subject/object divide as reality's basic split 
too.  Yet the subject/object divide is still an active 
analogy.  Maybe using mind/matter would be more helpful.   The MOQ 
states that it is analogue on analogue all the way down.  Seems to me 
a spov is an analogy, and I'm suggesting it's a conceptual analogy 
pointing to reality (experience, quality, value &etc.), not reality itself.



>However the former SOM has become the
>intellectual level and here the S/O rules and here we may speak about
>language concepts as different from what it is about. "The nature of a
>spov" conveys the same "forbidden" S/O split outside of intellect.
>There is no nature to inorganic patterns, no emotional component or
>anything.

I agree there is no natural phenomenon within an inorganic pattern, 
but I do think an inorganic pattern refers to some external, natural 
phenomena.  And there is something, I'm calling it a 
sensual/emotional component, that I feel in relationship to all 
patterns.  I'm just considering what it might be.  I am sure science 
has named it, but I'm not necessarily considering from a scientific 
frame-of-reference.




>And yet we can't be all Zen-ish (cagey) regarding the levels and I've
>found this list of their respective "expressions" most useful:
>
>                Interaction - Sensation - Emotion - Reason
>
>Inorganic value expresses itself as interaction, the biological by
>sensation, the social by emotion and intellect by reason.

Interesting.  Is this your interpretation, or is there, additionally, 
RMP's elaboration of this idea?



> > When I use the word conceptual, I mean a spov is primarily mental
> > activity.  I do not mean a nice neat definition, or primarily language,
> > but all that can be held in mind pertaining to the phenomena?  Am I
> > making any sense this far?
>
>Mental as contrasted to corporeal is another S/O. Your "...I use the
>word..." seems to imply that we live inside a conceptual bubble
>impossible to escape, but this is seen from intellect's S/O. As seen
>from the MOQ language is nothing more than a most useful social
>pattern, this one intellect adapt for conveying its own S/O-reasoning
>among those that language belongs to a conceptual realm different
>from what it conceptualize.
>
>Do this make sense to you?

Using the English language seems to put me inside a conceptual 
bubble.  It puts you inside the bubble too.  If you think you're 
presenting us with mystical insights, I don't get it.  Analogy on 
analogy on analogy.  For all your pointing, you're using the same 
messy analogues as everyone else.

I experience, to some degree, that 
everything-is-connected-to-everything, and is an ever-changing, 
collection of overlapping, interrelated, inorganic, biological, 
social and intellectual, static patterns of value within a flow of 
Dynamic Quality.  And to be true to this, I need to dance it.  Not 
all my experience requires language.  I understand language is a less 
effective tool, but on this list it's all I have.  Dmb has a knack 
for it.  You, not so much...  Poetry can move closer, but then you 
reject that as foolishness, don't you?

So I get that you're not interested in my line of thought.  Okay.

Marsha






.
.
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.
.
.