[MD] {Spam?} Re: [MD} The relativity of the MoQ

Tue Sep 1 10:47:22 PDT 2009

  I agree.

  ----- Mensagem de valkyr at att.net ---------
    Data: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 11:51:09 -0400
    De: MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
Endereço para Resposta (Reply-To): moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Assunto: {Spam?} Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ
      Para: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org

>
> Bo,
>
> I'm still with you.  The Intellectual Level is about objectifying
abstract
> symbols:
>
> "Objectification is the process by which abstract concepts are
treated as if
> they were concrete things or physical objects. In this sense the
term is
> synonym to reification."
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectification
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of
> skutvik at online.no
> Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 1:35 AM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ
>
> Hi Ron
>
> 30 Aug.
>
> I had said:
>
>> > DMB entered back in the mid nineties shortly after the forming
of the 
>> > Lila Squad with an intense interest in Mythology as conveyed by
Campbell
>> > and a conviction of this fitting with MOQ's social level (which
it does)
>> > but he was  "seduced" by Paul Turner whose mission was to debunk
the SOL
>> > interpretation and after that ..... well without the right
>> > interpretation the MOQ becomes a drag, nothing fits and it can't
explain
>> > or predict anything.
>
> Ron:
>
>> Many times, by many examples do we use to explain the benifits and
the
>> explanitory power of the Moq as we understand it per Pirsig, which
you
>> do not agree with even Pirsig himself. You however have yet to
give
>> ONE example of the explanitory power your SOL provides other than
your
>> say-so.
>
> First "the way you understand it" is that SOM is one among many
> intellectual patterns, and the definition of the 4th. level is "the
> manipulation of symbols ...etc." Is that correct
>
> The MOQ postulates an principal  struggle between the lower and
> upper levels, that they mutually regard each other as "evil",
biological
> life struggles to avoid death and "inorgany" does its best to
prevent
> life. OK, why would manipulation of symbol be offensive to
"society"
> and vice versa. This is completely illogical, while SOM
(objectivity-
> over-subjectivity) and social values are completely incompatible.
>
> Then very generally (because I don't have LILA with me here, but I
> will provide quotes if needed)  Pirsig says that every major
conflict up
> through the (later) age have been varieties of the social-
intellectual
> struggle and if so intellect must be the value of the S/O
distinction
> (with emphasis on the "objective over subjective" part) there can't
be
> other intellectual patterns or this would be invalid, then
everything
> must have been a "civil war" within intellect.
>
> All intellectual pattern that Pirsig lists in LILA are based on the
S/O
> (again the "objective over subjective" part). Free this and free
that,
> independent this and independent that, all is about freeing
everything
> from the social bonds by showing that these are subjective. It's
more
> than plain that intellect must be the objective as different from
> subjective (the latter the pejorative term that intellect applies
to
> everything social)
>
> The Nazi vs Democracy conflict Pirsig sees as Social values' last
> stand against intellect and if so Intellect must be the value of
the
> objective freedoms and independency  over what it saw as evil
itself,
> namely the individual submission under society's demands for giving
> everything for the "cause". If not this would be a struggle between
> nazi "ideas" and democratic ditto  ... which is good SOM, but not
> MOQ.
>
> The present "Western Values" that the Muslims hate so much (but
> want the economical benefits of) is clearly Intellect in the shape
of
> democracy - not merely elections but all its shores against
despotism
> which is the curse of the Islamic culture. Any dictator are
welcomed if
> only dedicated to islam, no "Christian" (intellectual) distinction
> between religion and state. THAT in fact  is the very "evil" they
fight
> against with such ferocity ... and disregard of life, which is
society's
> force, the individual is supposed to give its life freely to defend
the
> "cause".
>
>> you can't even mount a convincing argue to Ham, the perfect
subject
>> for your aims.
>
> I must first "smoke him out" and that is impossible.
>
>> one example
>
>> except, a sesame street explaination of moving the "M" from SOM
>> to the "M" of the MOQ.
>
>> Big Bird would be proud
>
> I don't understand your colloquialism, but now it's your turn to
tell how
> your interpretation of the intellectual level explains things.
>
> Bodvar
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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/
>

----- Final da mensagem de valkyr at att.net -----