[MD] Social Intellectual

[MarshaV]

On Jul 22, 2010, at 6:49 PM, Joseph Maurer wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> On 7/22/10 8:28 AM, "MarshaV" <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Marsha V and All,
> 
> [Marsha]
> And I believe there is the beginning of a quality-ievel (not DQ) which will
> represent a going beyond thoughts as we know them.  The Intellectual
> Level will/is its parent.  This belief is built on my experience via
> meditation.  
> 
> [Joe]
> DQ/SQ is exhaustive and I think the perception of a Quality level is DQ.

Marsha:
Yes, the way you put it the perception of a new 'quality level' would be DQ.



> Evolution SQ is a concept for describing DQ in quality-levels.  Evolution
> adds its own principle of individuation to the individuals within a level.
> Therefore the levels are discreet.  It can be confusing keeping levels and
> individuals named after the levels separate.

Marsha:
Ahhhh.  Yes, I see, you are correct, it is very confusing to call a new level 
the 'quality level' when all levels represent quality (static).  A better 
descriptive name of this new level is needed.  


> 
> [Marsha]
> I understand the metaphysical assumption underlying intellectual patterns
> to be of the subject-object variety.  It is deeply embedded in our psyche
> (habits) and deeply imbedded in our language.  But then I speak only of
> intellectual static patterns of value only.  I exclude words like intellect
> and intelligence because they confuse the issue.
> 
> [Joe]
> I am unclear about how a faculty for perception like intellect confuses the
> intellectual static patterns of value unless it is confusing DQ/SQ at the
> intellectual level with DQ only emotional, higher emotional and higher
> intellectual levels.

In the fourth level, I understand 'intellectual' to be an adjective describing 
the way its collection of patterns function, and for me they function on the 
basis of a SOM assumption.  -  No matter how I investigate 'intellect'  I
get confused how to relate it to intellectual patterns.  I bounce back and 
forth between the definitions of 'intellect', 'perceptions', 'faculty', 'capacity',
and become a little bit nuts.  It is beyond my understanding of language 
to adjust it.  


> 
> [Marsha]
> The most basic definition of metaphysics is the branch of philosophy that
> examines the nature of reality. A metaphysics represents reality. And sure
> it described and re-described and re-described, but under it all they are
> all varieties of subject- object reality.  Enlightenment, it seems to me, is
> about transcending self and object thinking.
> 
> [Joe]
> The intellectual level is SOL in DQ/SQ evolution.  I accept an emotional, a
> higher emotional, and a higher intellectual level in DQ only evolution.  I
> do not know if the last two levels agree with your view of enlightenment.

Marsha:
I am definitely not qualified to discuss or define enlightenment, but I can 
daydream.  To me it would be the level where it is known (heart) that 
everything is connected to everything (no self, no objects), and that way of 
knowing is deeply embedded in the psyche and always present.  If by 
emotional you mean joy, well I totally agree.  The fourth level would be the 
minor fall, and the fifth level will be the major lift, like from Leonard Cohen's 
song Hallelujah.  How about you?  

I admire the levels as a method for pointing the dominant, over-intellectualized 
attitude to the moon, but I hold the level structure lightly.  Knowing the transitory 
nature of all patterns has made the biggest impact.  

I know most consider emotions related to the biological level, but I agree with 
you there is a higher level of emotions.  

Has the choir you sing with ever sung Cohen's Hallelujah?   



Marsha








> 
> 
> 
>> Marsha:
>> And I believe there is the beginning of a quality-ievel (not DQ) which will
>> represent a going beyond thoughts as we know them.  The Intellectual
>> Level will/is its parent.  This belief is built on my experience via
>> meditation.  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I understand the metaphysical assumption underlying intellectual patterns
>> to be of the subject-object variety.  It is deeply embedded in our psyche
>> (habits) 
>> and deeply imbedded in our language.  But then I speak only of intellectual
>> static 
>> patterns of value only.  I exclude words like intellect and intelligence
>> because 
>> they confuse the issue.
>> 
>> 
>>> SOM is an intellectual description of reality, not the capacity
>>> to create intellectual descriptions. Big difference.
>> 
>> The most basic definition of a metaphysics is the branch of
>> philosophy that examines the nature of reality.  A metaphysics
>> represents reality.  And sure it described and re-described and
>> re-described, but under it all they are all varieties of subject- object
>> reality.  Enlightenment, it seems to me, is about transcending self and
>> object thinking. 
>> 
>> Marsha  
>> 
>> 
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> 
> 
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html


 
___