[MD] The Mythos-Logos issue.

[Andre Broersen]

Bodvar to Mary, Andre, All
Mary is right,...The subject/object distinction (or aggregate) covers 
exactly the intellectual LEVEL,

Andre:
Mary is wrong and your addendum is your ghost Don Q. Reducing the 
intellectual level to this capacity only, does not correspond to 
experience...of which the MOQ is a finger pointing to.

Bodvar:

The expansion (of reason) issue. If the intellectual level has SOM as
one level among several, is it then just SOM that will be expanded or
will the MOQ take the topmost position of "good intellect"  and press
old SOM under as "bad intellect?

Andre:
This just evidences the poor quality reading you have done and the poor quality cul-de-sac you are left with given your interpretation. The pattern Phaedrus 'expanded' was rationality. The scientifically inspired way of thinking, of analyzing immediate experience, the results of which came to replace that immediate experience. The method which came to analyze social patterns of value as well. This came to dominate Western culture, exacerbated by the Cartesian division. All have their historical roots and reasons for having done so. Mr. Pirsig sets the Church's influence (for. ex.) as one of the culprits of science's apparent 'objective' claims.. LILA exposes this moral struggle.

The other thing Mr. Pirsig has done is free the intellectual level of just one capability (your SOM) by suggesting it is the 'skillful manipulation of symbols...'.

A subject-object metaphysics is a low quality intellectual pattern. It has nothing to do with your 'bad intellect' (this is what your interpretation leads you to conclude).

Bodvar:
You have learned all the right phrases from the grownups, but coming
from you I shudder.

Andre:
At least I have learned something over the years Bodvar...and just because I saw through your imaginary windmill... still feel cheated/betrayed/exposed?

(Listen carefully to John Lennon's 'How Do You Sleep' with his response to McCartney's efforts).