[MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ

[X Acto]

Ron prev:
> You posit DQ/SQ AS REALITY'S GROUND.a truth that remains true
> everywhere, independently of human thought or feelings. correct?
Bo:
There is a level-like relationship between the MOQ and its own 
uppermost level, this is so because intellect was SOM before the MOQ 
and the MOQ is "out of SOM". It isn't every day reality is turned upside 
down and because there aren't no fixed Archimedian point during this 
operation there will be an immediate timeless shift from one point of 
view to the next.  

Ron:
?????


Bo:
Now, this understood, and ditto regarding MOQ's basic tenet of each 
upper level being a pattern of the lower "taking off on a purpose of its 
own".we understand that the MOQ was an intellectual pattern that has 
"taken off on a purpose of its own", i.e: no longer an intellectual pattern 
yet in the same relationship with intellect that all levels have with the 
one below. 

Ron:
The problem, the crisis our culture is in, is exactly that.
Intellectual patterns taking off on a purpose of it's own.
Pirsig maintains that the best intellectual patterns are those that sustain
biological and social level patterns, ones that take off on purposes of
their own tend not to value and sustain the lower levels. Problem.
Big problem.

Bo:
Thus, the MOQ resulted from the super-SOMist Phaedrus using the 
S/O logic to "escape velocity" where the MOQ took off on the said 
purpose. He could not have done this without applying (his 
intelligence) along intellect's lines - as impossible as the social level 
emerging without its biological foundation - and why  the MOQ is 
regarded as "independent of human thought. That's its intellectual 
base it can't escape. 

Ron:
whoa, super SOMists, escape velocities, intellegence along intellects lines,
MoQ independant of human thought,
this is starting to sound like a science fiction story, you talk of Pirsig as a divine
messiah.

Bo:
ZAMM flirted a little with the "Man the measure ..." but in LILA it was 
nothing about the Sophists .            

Ron prev:
> Rationality is a higher static good, objective rationalism is better
> than subjective value. Objective rationalism has dynamic insights and
> raptures. One of which is the  Dynamic/Static distinction itself, the
> TRUE split of physical reality, correct?
Bo:
Intellect's S/O (irrational/rational) distinction is the highest static good, 
but intellect knows no levels, it was the PAST it deemed irrational. 
However the MOQ knows the big picture, namely that intellect does 
not apply at the social level.

It's not only intellect-focussed people (if that is "objective realism"?)  
that has dynamic experiences. Medieval Times (social level)  had lots 
of saints but their visions were religiously tainted. Modern people's 
(intellectually focussed) ditto are about of transcending the subjective 
prison that intellect-as-SOM sentenced humankind to life in.     

Ron prev:
> not mental/corporeal  but language/experience language is not
> merely mental and experience is not merely corporal.

Bo:
MOQ's DQ/SQ does not correspond to experience/language. language 
is the symbols medium  that INTELLIGENCE manipulates.    

Orthodox MOQ - whether you subscribe to it or not - says that both 
SOM and MOQ are intellectual pattern, and if so intellect must be the 
equivalent of MIND: a mental compartment different from the outer 
"corporeal" realm. ... and SOM prevails  

Ron:
Pirsig states that it is ALL mind, the outer "corporeal realm" is a concept.
everything is a concept, all static patterns are concepts. SOM does not
prevail, for SOM  is the idea of an outer objective corporeal realm.
you said yourself that subjectivism arises with objectivism, if objectivity
is known to be conceptual which it has been verified to be (quantum physics)
then subjectivism vanishes also and what is left is experiential value.

Ron prev:
> first lets remember that expereince is not corporeal, it being
> corporeal is an idea, an objective idea. second language is part of
> expereince but it is not immediate expereince the expereince that
> comes before thoughts or words.

Bo:
With a lead balloon like this how can the MOQ make it?

Ron:
please explain why this does not work. The confusing intellegence/intellect
distinction you make is the symptom of the intellectual level of western
culture dominated by objective intellectual patterns. THAT is the whole
problem Pirsig wishes to change and the one you want to keep.
It's the point of both books, our cultures intellectual level is dominated
by objectivism. Its whats killing the planet and you want to keep it
that way. For what reason I have no idea.


















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/