[MD] The 4th. level's two interpretations. Part 1

[skutvik at online.no]

Marksmit
that 
28 Oct.you wrote::

> Just for the purposes of broadening the discussion, I would like
> to bring in the various levels from a purely descriptive, physical
> view, with some dynamic interplay thrown in.

This can't go on with every newbie starting on "square zero" launching 
his/her opinions of the various Q-levels and then responses from the 
various "oldies" with just as many opinions mangling the MOQ totally.

Pirsig says that the static levels' layout isn't very original, and that's 
right regarding the terms themselves, but language is still SOM-loaded 
and until it becomes Quality-loaded  a "transformation" must be 
performed. 

# 1. is no longer "substance" but "inorganic patterns of quality". 
Marksmit will notice how this resolves SOM's difference between 
particles and the forces, the strong nuclear force is a much "inorganic 
quality" as the particles.   

#2 - the biological - seems to match SOM's "life" yet it really is 
"biological quality patterns". This distinction is important because it has 
implications for the evolution theory that (Pirsig claims) the MOQ 
reconciles with creationism.  

# 2. - the social - likewise. These Q-patterns aren't mere arbitrary 
assemblies of human beings, but the VALUE of cooperation 

#4 - the intellectual -  has caused most trouble. Years and years of 
bickering You may have noticed my SOL (intellect=SOM) against as 
many strange notions, your own one such. Why the SOL isn't 
accepted is because SOM still rules, its (mind-interpretation of) 
"intellect" is superimposed on MOQ's "intellect" and mangles the whole 
MOQ.    . 

Bodvar