[MD] irony and socrates
skutvik at online.no
skutvik at online.no
Fri Oct 16 09:53:45 PDT 2009
For Ian
16 Oct. you wrote:
> So, at last we return from whence we came ...
Agree, after more than 10 years! 1998 is the earliest archive date and
about that time I began my SOList career.
> All the interesting stuff (anything that's better than S/OM) is in
> this thing you call the DQ/SQ "arrangement".
No sarcasm Ian but the DQ/SQ arrangement is the MOQ itself, and
it's no surprise that the levels are subsets of the greater Q-system
called the Metaphysics of Quality.
> Where is this "arrangement" what's it "made of" ?
> And when we "consider" it, talk about it, debate it in our thoughts,
> actions, experiences, writings and e-mails what do we call this
> philosophical activity - this "quality thinking" beyond SOM Intellect
Quality is Reality and no moqist (at least) asks what it is "made of",
again you display the intellect=the thinking-faculty notion (in my
words) that intellect (before the 4th.static level!) were occupied by
biological survival, then with social schemes and now with intellectual
ideas - hopefully to be replaced by Quality stuff - but that's not the
STATIC level. It is SOM, no other interpretation makes sense.
Bodvar
PS
Pirsig has not rejected the SOL, his latest on the subject was that if it
has Quality it would percolate to the top. And I definitely have the
feeling that it slowly percolates upwards.
> ?
>
> Regards
> Ian
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 2:55 PM, <skutvik at online.no> wrote:
> > For Ian
> >
> > 16 Oct.:
> >
> >> OK, Bo so for you ALL intellectual patterns and better than social
> >> patterns. ALL intellectual patterns are S/O based.
> >
> > Yes, intellect is the highest static level and thus its patterns are
> > "better" than any social pattern - that's MOQ dogma. And finally the
> > SOL point is clear: All intellectual patterns are S/O.
> >
> >> So ANY S/O pattern is better than ANY Social PoV in your world ?
> >> Are there ANY patterns anywhere that are better than S/O ? (Please
> >> don't guess what I know, just answer the questions.) Ian
> >
> > You have it just right, because (I postulate that) intellect = SOM
> > and we know that the 4th. level is higher than the 3rd. it follows
> > that any S/O pattern is better than any social pattern ...anywhere
> > in the universe.
> >
> > Yet, intellect is a static level and subordinate to the overall
> > DQ/SQ "arrangement", that point must be clear too.
> >
> > Bodvar
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 10:24 AM, <skutvik at online.no> wrote:
> >> > Ian
> >> >
> >> > 15 Oct.
> >> >
> >> >> Bo, you still didn't answer any of my questions directly. (The
> >> >> first two were closed - yes/no) Anyway you then offered "What
> >> >> you "know" is that a subject/object metaphysics has invaded an
> >> >> otherwise neutral innocent container called "intellect" and that
> >> >> SOM can be removed and replaced by the MOQ. That's the way you
> >> >> understand it ...no?"
> >> >
> >> >> Hell no - how dare you - how crass an idiot do you accuse me of
> >> >> being. These are the insults I am talking about. Insults against
> >> >> the idea that we were ever having an intelligent conversation.
> >> >
> >> > Calm down Ian. The issue is and remains if the intellectual level
> >> > is SOM - all of it, every last bit - or if SOM is one
> >> > intellectual pattern and the MOQ another intellectual pattern.
> >> > Can I have YOUR answer please?
> >> >
> >> >> Now here's a clue - look at the questions I actually asked. Need
> >> >> a further clue ? My answers to #1 and #2 are No and No. Please
> >> >> answer them and stop hurling insults.
> >> >
> >> > # 1. "Are all social PoV's in need of debunking"
> >> >
> >> > You must be way off moqwise if your answer is "NO". Each level's
> >> > purpose is to "debunk" - in the sense of controlling - the lower
> >> > level.
> >> >
> >> > # 2. "Are all intellectual PoV's free of social prejudices"
> >> >
> >> > This is plain "NO".
> >> >
> >> >> Then we can move on to #3 - and the massive complex interaction
> >> >> between SoMism and MoQism in patterns ranging across the social
> >> >> and intellectual levels. The footnotes to Plato.
> >> >
> >> > # 3 "How can we tell a good intellectual PoV from an inferior
> >> > # social
> >> > PoV?" I answered that the moral code between society and the
> >> > intellect is crystal clear. Where "moqism" enters I don't know.
> >> >
> >> >> Of course it's the "intellectual framework" that's wrong - I've
> >> >> stated that 5 or 6 times now (to agree with you) in this thread.
> >> >
> >> > This is identical to my initial question above. If (you mean
> >> > that) intellect's framework is S/O and S/O alone. Not a mind
> >> > that can turn DQ/SQ at short notice.
> >> >
> >> > Bodvar
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 9:47 AM, <skutvik at online.no> wrote:
> >> >> > For Ian
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 14 Oct.:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Hi Bo, leave off the insults I asked several simple open
> >> >> >> questions, which you ignored. You see your intelocutors as
> >> >> >> ensnared in GOF-Intellect's tentacles. I just see you in that
> >> >> >> bind.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > And I answered them one by one, without a trace of insults.
> >> >> > They were:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > #1: Are all social PoV's in need of debunking
> >> >> >
> >> >> > #2: Are all intellectual PoV's free of social prejudices
> >> >> >
> >> >> > # 3 How can we tell a good / intellectual PoV from an
> >> >> > # inferior /
> >> >> > social PoV ?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > # 4 (How do we do any of that if intellect = SOM ?)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > But if my "crime" is that all questions requires the SOL
> >> >> > interpretation to be properly answered, what can I do?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> The Pirsig quotes are recognized and clear ... even the one
> >> >> >> you double quote / highlight thus :
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "It is the intellectual framework with which one deals with
> >> >> > the data that is at fault. The fault is within subject-object
> >> >> > metaphysics itself."
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> We know this.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > What you "know" is that a subject/object metaphysics has
> >> >> > invaded an otherwise neutral innocent container called
> >> >> > "intellect" and that SOM can be removed and replaced by the
> >> >> > MOQ. That's the way you understand it ...no? But Pirsig says
> >> >> > "It is the intellectual framework ... that is at fault"
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> It's the starting point for a discussion. It tell us the
> >> >> >> problem clearly enough, but it doesn't tell us any solution.
> >> >> >> ie That GOF SOMist kind of intellect framework is at fault;
> >> >> >> what does a better / MOQish "intellect" look like?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "A better MOQish intellect" means the said
> >> >> > "container--intellect" filled by the MOQ ... no? The 4th.
> >> >> > level is a sub-set of the MOQ, bu no twist and bend of logic
> >> >> > can this contain the MOQ. Study the "container" passage in
> >> >> > LILA!
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> You don't even have to call it intellect if you want to
> >> >> >> reserve that term for the GOF mental / SOMist kind.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ??????????????
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Bo
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> (Clearly it is more than the mental - how often do we have to
> >> >> >> agree that ?) Regards Ian
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 4:55 PM, <skutvik at online.no> wrote:
> >> >> >> > For Ron
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > 12 Oct.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Ian to Bo:
> >> >> >> >> > Some hope : You suggested. "Every single intellectual
> >> >> >> >> > pattern is about debunking the social [PoV's]." Nice
> >> >> >> >> > idea. A hierarchical relationship of Intellect over
> >> >> >> >> > Social - which is where we started. But, so many
> >> >> >> >> > questions. Are all social PoV's in need of debunking ?
> >> >> >> >> > Are all intellectual PoV's free of social prejudices ?
> >> >> >> >> > How can we tell a good / intellectual PoV from an
> >> >> >> >> > inferior / social PoV ? (How do we do any of that if
> >> >> >> >> > intellect = SOM ?)
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Ron:
> >> >> >> >> Great questions Ian, How IS any of that done if intellect
> >> >> >> >> equals SOM. SOM equalling intellect is already the
> >> >> >> >> universaly agreed apon assumption.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Yes I know that you all regard SOM as ONE intellectual
> >> >> >> > pattern, but the point is that for the MOQ to make sense
> >> >> >> > its intellectual level has to be SOM. Regrettably I don't
> >> >> >> > take notes of all indications of this interpretation in
> >> >> >> > Pirsig's writings, but the latest was
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Pirsig in LILA: "There is the materialist school that
> >> >> >> > says reality is all matter, which creates mind. There is
> >> >> >> > the idealist school that says it is all mind, which
> >> >> >> > creates matter [....] It is the intellectual framework
> >> >> >> > with which one deals with the data that is at fault. The
> >> >> >> > fault is within subject-object metaphysics itself.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > "It is the intellectual framework with which one deals with
> >> >> >> > the data that is at fault. The fault is within
> >> >> >> > subject-object metaphysics itself.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I can of course not force you don't see the obvious,
> >> >> >> > intellect's tentacles are tough and the toughest one is the
> >> >> >> > term "intellect" that indicates mental and - consequently -
> >> >> >> > intellectual patterns as ideas or thoughts - of which the
> >> >> >> > MOQ is one - but as said: The subject/object distinction
> >> >> >> > (in all its forms) is abolished, "intellectual patterns"
> >> >> >> > aren't mental patterns but the value of the
> >> >> >> > MENTAL/CORPOREAL distinction.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > But now I understand that you neither care about Pirsig's
> >> >> >> > writings nor my interpretations of these writings. So
> >> >> >> > good-bye to you.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Bodvar
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> >> >> >> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> >> >> >> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.o
> >> >> >> > rg Archives:
> >> >> >> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> >> >> >> > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> 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/
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 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/
> >> >> >
> >> >> 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/
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 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/
> >> >
> >> 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/
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > 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/
> >
> 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/
>
>
>
More information about the Moq_Discuss
mailing list