[MD] Buddhism's s/o

[MarshaV]

On Apr 27, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Andre Broersen wrote:

> Marsha to Andre:
> 
> Thanks Andre.
> 
> Andre:
> Marsha, this is at the end of your post. I can take it to mean that this is now finished for you? Could be, but please let me indulge as I am learning from this exchange with you.

Ask away???  

> 
> Marsha:
> I have not fully understood Bo's SOL to endorse it.   I agree with Bo that the Intellectual patterns are based on SOM both East and West for the reasons I previously explained, and I think there is a Quality level emerging.  I tend to think of the fourth level as intellectual static patterns of value
> rather than intellect; it's less confusing.
> 
> Andre:
> As far as I understand Bodvar's SOL it simply excludes (by its own Western definition and the way Bodvar argues about it) values.
> The beauty of the MOQ is that it adds a sense of intellectual quality, an aesthetic appreciation of beauty, an elegant theory (the intellectual 'attitude/appreciation' I spoke of in a recent, previous post with regards to this Dutch mathematician and Buddhist priest).

This is your opinion...  And?


> The MoQ already adds this 'affective' pre-conceptual domain through which 'intellect' is guided and influenced. Again both James, Pirsig and certainly Eastern philosophy take this domain for granted as it is part and parcel of pure experience of the undifferentiated aesthetic continuum. One doesn't need a meta-level (as Bodvar recently argued for). One doesn't need a 'super' rationality. One doesn't need a new Q- level.

All the levels, including the Intellectual level are contained WITHIN the Quality(DQ/sq)-perspective.  


> It is already here and the SOL is just a hinderance and the arguments in favour a strawperson!

Your opinion... 


> Point is we are (culturally) conditioned not to see or appreciate this value.

For me Reality is Quality(DQ(unpatterned experience)/static quality(patterned 
experience(inorganic,biological,social&Intellectual(SOM))))    
 

> That doesn't mean it is not there. We need to be sensitized. Both James and Pirsig have shown us that. No wonder the 'East' wondered what the fuss was about re ZMM. They know all that stuff already.

Every Asian is enlightened???   You are a fool!   



> Anyway, thank you too Marsha.

If you have no questions, how are you going to learn anything?  Oh, you were just 
kidding. ;-)  

Are you Ron?   



Marsha  

   

 
___