[MD] CO2 and Climate.

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Mark

12 Dec. u wrote:

> Thanks for the explanation.  Now I see what you are describing "the
> subject that observes the objective world".  OK, I'm with you.  This
> has been called a number of things, I prefer the term Atman.  

You are not with me at all, the subject/object distinction is SOM, not 
any "Atman". I asked if you are have read any of Pirsig's works, you 
didn't answer something I take as a "no" and it shows.

> Yes, the subject, which is outside the brain's logic.  The brain is the
> ego, in my definition.  The Ego is the hardware through which the
> subject experiences the objective world, the brain is also part of the
> objective world.  Traditionally, "intellect" means something else, but
> I'm fine with this clarification, I will read your posts accordingly. 

The subject isn't merely outside the brain's logic, it's the 
Subject/Object distinction as reality's fundament which creates a host 
of paradoxes (=violations of any and all kind of logic)

Hadn't it been for this below I would have written you off as a "Ham" 
case.

> My point is that we have lost the descriptive emotional basis for
> classifying the world around us.  The world has become dead and there
> is no animism.

As you surely haven't noticed I ascribe an "expression" to each level:

Interaction (inorganic) Sensation (biology) Emotion(society) Reason 
(intellect)

Further, what Phaedrus of ZAMM saw as SOM ousting Quality (Aretê) 
was intellect taking off from its social parent ...on a purpose of its 
own.  You are right that this looks as ourselves having lost touch with 
"the emotional description of the world" and what the present Social 
Level focussed culture - the "Semitic" (Jews and Muslims) - fights to 
maintain.

And - if you will open a small crack for the MOQ - the reason that 
Intellect looks "dead, without animism" is its position as reality itself 
(its SOM capacity) once its MOQ context - as the S/O distinction -  is 
realized it's a great value, the highest and best level. 

> I do not believe we are any smarter, we are just going
> through a phase. 

You are right, our brain's computation capacity - AKA intelligence - 
has not increased since the Homo Sapiens. It's a computer that can 
be programmed with any program. Originally with biology's "survival" 
then by society's "our cause" and finally with intellects "objectivity". 
Now it must be re-programmed with the MOQ's program, but that's 
not easy. 

> To claim that a belief in gods is somehow inferior is
> expressed most likely because you do not have that feeling.  Instead
> you have this feeling of Quality,  which is not nearly as complex and
> filling.  I would suggest you do a little thinking about what gods
> represent, why they are used, and why  we are so much better of now
> that we have provided dead nouns to things. Call the sun a ball of
> flame we orbit around, or call it a god being carried across the sky
> by a chariot. 

The MOQ claims that "belief in gods" (the social-emotional level) is 
statically inferior to the intellectual-rational explanation, but puts it all 
in a greater perspective that shows that each level is a level of the 
VALUE and the necessary base for the next. Even the intellectual-
rational is necessary for the MOQ. 

> Both are just descriptions, neither right nor wrong.
> Living with animism is a much fuller life than with a scientific
> explanation. If that is the course of Quality, then Quality would
> prefer gods.

Not "just descriptions", they are different levels. 

> Reading or rereading stuff from Joseph Campbell would be a good place
> to start.

I know Campbell's, it's an excellent presentation of the social - 
emotional (mythological) level.But I suggest YOU to read Pirsig, its a 
requirement to be allowed here. 

Bodvar