[MD] The Mythos-Logos issue.

[skutvik at online.no]

Arlo

1 July.:

[Platt]
> Oh, oh. The spectre of censorship arises. Now the arbiters of "the
> truth" threaten. Does your warning to sentence Bo to Siberia also
> apply to me, Mary, Marsha and others who are at least willing to
> entertain the idea that the Pirsig may be wrong?

Yepp, Gulag next. ;-) 
 
[Arlo]
> I'm guessing you didn't even read Horse's post, or you're trying to do
> your typical distortion bullshit. This has NOTHING to do with thinking
> Pirsig is wrong. I think Pirsig is wrong about a few things. That is a
> VALID argumentative position to hold. Say Pirsig is wrong, say Bo is
> right. No harm, no foul. The issue, as Horse clearly points out, is in
> the dishonesty that Bo's ideas are somehow Pirsig's ideas. They are
> NOT. You say "other who are at least willing to entertain the idea that
> the Pirsig may be wrong"... GREAT! Entertain away! I do. But that is not
> the issue. As Horse (and Ian, and others) make plain. 

The "last straw" for those who wants MOQ back into SOM is that the 
SOL interpretation isn't Pirsig's - or Phaedrus' as I like to say - original 
understanding. Of course one must not expect a line that says so 
explicitly, all is deductions and inductions.  

ZAMM page 241: my parenthesis

    He'd been speculating about the relationship of Quality to mind 
    and matter and had identified Quality as the parent of mind 
    and matter, that event which gives birth to mind and matter. 
    This Copernican inversion of the relationship of Quality to the 
    objective world could sound mysterious if not carefully 
    explained, but he didn't mean it to be mysterious. He simply 
    meant that at the cutting edge of time, before an object can be 
    distinguished (by a subject, i.e. the S/O distinction)  there must 
    be a kind of nonintellectual awareness, which he called 
    awareness of Quality.   

We see the first shape of what would become the DQ/SQ, but as we 
know it was just one static "level" at this stage so "nonintellect" is the 
dynamic and "intellect" is the subject/object fall-out. Later in the "proto 
moq" diagram the SOM (Classic to become "static") is explicitly 
subtitled "intellect".  There are more, for instance the intellectual knife 
that cuts S/O-ishly, but this you folks counter with intellect can reach 
for a new knife..  

And this is exactly what ails the anti-SOL faction, namely that the term 
intellect (to them) means "what goes on in minds". However, MOQ's 
first job in office is to abandon mind and matter. Moq's "inorganic" 
does not correspond to matter and "intellect" does not correspond to 
mind. And again: Phaedrus original metaphysical revolution was that 
the mind/matter juggernaut is a fall-out from Quality ....  AND HE 
CALLED IT INTELLECT! 

With LILA it would not have posed the least problem with 3 static 
levels before intellect - all levels are dynamic pre-something: Pre-
inorganic, pre-organic, pre-social and finally pre-intellectual  
developments, but alas something happened in between and "intellect" 
came out the said mind-like way. Still when he wrote LILA the SOL 
occasionally emerged - like new particles show up in physicists 
equations - but he hastily added "this intellectual pattern ...etc." that left 
a way out. 

Bodvar