[MD] concerning SOL??

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Steve

2 Sep. you wrote:

> I completely agree that it sounds very strange to say that the
> intellectual level is a single fact/value rather than the collection of
> ALL intellectual patterns of value. 

Do you find it strange that all biological patterns are about one single 
fact/value: LIFE? 

> Certainly the habit of mind that involves asking "is this subjective or
> objective?" is one such pattern of value, but it is just one.

It was SOM (represented by his colleagues) that asked Phaedrus this 
question and the fact that they saw it as a dilemma shows that it was 
regarded unavoidable - Quality HAD to fit the S/O matrix - something 
that shows that it was the ONLY way of thinking there were.   

> Asking this question is not the only habit of mind/pattern of
> thought/intellectual pattern of value/pattern of manipulating symbols
> that stand for patterns of experience. 

MOQ's 4th. level is the S/O  - or Mind/Matter - aggregate not merely 
"mind" or "thought" this is how the 4th. level - internally - regards 
things: A mind that manipulates abstract copies of a reality "out there". 
And the 4th. level always asks questions aligned along its S/O matrix.

Will you never snap out of the "intellect-intelligence fallacy"? 
Intelligence (the ability to manipulate memory (abstractions) along 
logical "gates", has been with existence since the biological  
complicated brain. and has been used by the levels to promote their 
respective value, but is also - SPURRED ON BY DQ - able to "ask 
questions"  beyond       

> Unfortunately, Bo has gotten stuck on defining the levels as each
> having a single value rather than collections of patterns of value of
> four types as Pirsig has defined his MOQ. 

This is plain silly dear Steve. As previously said all levels IS a master-
pattern that has umpteen sub- and sub-sub patterns. 

> Of course Bo is welcome to develop his own MOQ, but he has not
> demonstrated to me that thinking of each level as "the value of X" has
> much value, though he insists that doing so is the only way for an MOQ
> to make progress. It sounds like you are having the same
> frustration.

You see how DMB had to withdraw, without the backing of THE MOQ 
it becomes a drag. There is no "own MOQ", Pirsig had no means to 
foresee all implications of the movement he started, the similarity with 
Socrates-Plato is striking. They did not have an inkling about the 
juggernaut they had set moving, their obsession was Truth and/or 
Ideas. Pirsig's obsession was  Quality - the MOQ he regarded as 
some byproduct - but it's the MOQ that will replace SOM  .... by turning 
it into a sub-set of its own no other way of doing it is possible without 
being "bounced back" into SOM .

Bodvar