[MD] Language

[John Carl]

>
> [John]
> In my Q'm" system, the only patterns that can be disharmonius with reality
> or
> nature are intellectual patterns.
>
> [Arlo]
> So inorganic, biological and social patterns are never able to be
> disharmonious
> with nature?
>

Not if left to themselves.  Just like pruning your fruit trees in Fukuoka
Farming is useless because trees know how to grow if left alone.  But once
you mess with 'em, you gotta keep messing with them every year.



> Is this another "everything would be perfect if that stupid intellect
> wouldn't
> get in the way"? Wonder Pirsig placed it atop his hierarchy considering how
> its
> the only level that actually hinders "harmoniousness".
>
>

It's at the top because it dominates all other patterns.  But I don't think
intellect itself is bad.  The cosmos evolved it for a reason, it holds the
potential for infinite goodness.  But when intellect is bad, its horrid.



> But wait.. "intellect" is how we are able to build  "hammers". How can a
> "disharmonious" pattern produce something "harmonious"?
>
> And what about social patterns? Would you say the Third Reich was
> "disharmonious" with nature?



The way I see it is the Third Reich was a social pattern created according
intellectual ideas that were bad.  See Allen Bloom's Closing of the American
Mind for the full argument.


I'll respond more tonight, if you want to discuss this further.

Keep the lager outta your nose.

John