[MD] Empirical and Historical

[plattholden at gmail.com]

Hey Bo, 

On 20 Jul 2009 at 11:06, skutvik at online.no wrote:

> This is the most exact summary of the quandary I've ever read, your 
> description of the maze the MOQ has gone through to rid itself of 
> SOM's tentacles is spot on. However, some tentacles still cling, the 
> claim that the MOQ is an intellectual pattern is still valid it seems - the 
> Quality/MOQ a variant of that - DMB is adamant here, he seems not to 
> understand that seen from the highest "peak" neither the Quality/MOQ, 
> or the Quality/Concept divisions are valid: MOQ IS REALITY, one 
> doesn't get higher. However up there is no place to stay without 
> suffering from .... (a word I did not find) the static range is our abode 
> and at intellect its S/O can be used freely - must be used - only with its 
> limitations kept in mind (sic)           

The following from ZAMM helps explain why it's so hard for academics 
and other so-called intellectuals to understand Quality reality:


"He felt that intellectuals usually have the greatest trouble 
seeing this Quality, precisely because they are so swift and 
absolute about snapping everything into intellectual form. The 
ones who have the easiest time seeing this Quality are small 
children, uneducated people and culturally "deprived" people. 
These have the least predisposition toward intellectuality from 
cultural sources and have the least formal training to instill it 
further into them. That, he felt, is why squareness is such a 
uniquely intellectual disease. He felt he´d been accidentally 
immunized from it, or at least to some extent broken from the 
habit by his failure from school. After that he felt no 
compulsive identification with intellectuality and could 
examine anti-intellectual doctrines with sympathy."

Seems there are a number of MD contributors who have a 
"compulsive identification with intellectuality."
Platt