[MD] LC Comments

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Magnus

14 July u said to me:

> I think we can agree that we disagree on pretty much nowadays. Perhaps
> the starting point of it is here:
 
> You claim:
> REALITY IS OUR PERCEPTION OF REALITY!

> Yes, but not only that.
 
> When you "perceive" reality, it goes in through your senses and into
> your head, and there you manage your reality. Once in your head,
> there's no difference between a reality and a theory of that reality,
> or between gravity and a theory of gravity. They are identical.

You surely are a computer wizard, but your MOQ wizardry lacks. By 
the "Reality is our perception ..."I just tried to catch MOQ's essence, 
namely a break with SOM which is all about a quality-less reality "out 
there" that only gets quality "in our heads" - subjectively.     

> However, I claim that what you have in your head is an intellectual
> representation of reality, no different than a theory. That's why you
> can't distinguish gravity from the theory of gravity.

No,  the MOQ claims that only at the intellectual level is there a 
distinction between theory and reality. Look Magnus you need a 
update on the basics. 

P. of ZAMM's "hate object" was rationality, what he called SOM and 
his claim was that there was Golden Age when Quality (Good) and 
Reality were united in the Aretê Attitude. Then came SOM and 
destroyed the idyll by its Subject/Object split (I skip the finer points)       
Then LILA and the MOQ and now you see that everything points to the 
Aretê as the Social - and SOM as the Intellectual level. My reason for 
the this is that the social level IS  the very same non-dualist attitude 
(why people are drawn to religion) and intellect the very same S/O 
dualism in so many forms.    
 
> The worst part about your interpretation of the MoQ is that it fails
> to recognize the reality of other levels below the intellectual. 

What utter nonsense, I just expounded the immense value of the 
social level and could have continued with the bio/socio relationship, 
but to continue:. P. of ZAMM arrived at SOM being a fall-out of Quality 
thus the proto-moq in that book only had one "static" level namely 
SOM, but in that book IT IS (ALSO) CALLED IT INTELLECT!!!!!!!!! I 
don't know but this discussion seems like a plot not to observe this 
fact.Thus come LILA why did Pirsig not continue with this obvious S/O-
intellect but switch to the trite Magnusian "in our head"- intellect ?????    

> Just like Ham, your theory can't reconcile the fact that gravity has
> been causing the earth to circle the sun for billions of years before
> we came along. 

This is too silly. The MOQ postulates that the universe IS the inorganic 
"perception of quality", it (the MOQ) does not split the inorganic level 
into matter and laws  (gravity) that governs matter. The splitting 
between immaterial laws, forces ..etc. and the matter that obeys them 
is intellect's - science's - business..     

> And you keep accusing everyone except yourself for being trapped in
> SOM-land. But to me, it seems you have just changed from an objective
> reality where only objective truth counts, to a subjective reality
> inside your head.

I magnanimously forgive you this nonsense ;-). 

Bodvar