[MD] Capitalism: my experience

[X Acto]

26 feb Bo Quoted Pirsig and said:    

    [Lila pg 50] Or, using another analogy, saying that a 
    Metaphysics of Quality is false and a subject-object 
    metaphysics is true is like saying that rectangular coordinates 
    are true and polar coordinates are false. A map with the North 
    Pole at the center is confusing at first, but it's every bit as 
    correct as a Mercator map. In the Arctic it's the only map to 
    have. Both are simply intellectual patterns for interpreting 
    reality and one can only say that in some circumstances 
    rectangular coordinates provide a better, simpler interpretation.  

Pirsig have obvious has had many great ideas that at some stage 
surely served him on his way to the MOQ, but later some of these only 
muddles things, but Pirsig can't resist. The MOQ is the GLOBE that 
can have different flat (static) projections, one such is the  intellectual 
projection, another the social projection ...etc. If the MOQ is one 
intellectual projection and the SOM another and both- every bit as 
correct, what's the difference?      

Ron:
The difference is one believes it is not a map but reality itself. The other
uses the best map for the context. Plus we are talking maps and coordinate 
systems not globes. 
 






























> "BOTH (SoM & MoQ) ARE SIMPLY INTELLECTUAL PATTERNS"

> This is follow in the same paragraph by:
> 
> >[Lila pg 50]
> > Within a Metaphysics of Quality, science is A set of static
> > intellectual patterns.
> 
> SoM, the pseudo-metaphysical intellectual pattern that was the
> foundation of western science, is just like science, A SET OF STATIC
> INTELLECTUAL PATTERNS. MoQ is another, potentially better, set. Or at
> least in might be if it isn't waylaid by your obstinacy.
> 
> >> [Horse]
> >> Only in your head Bo. A metaphysics is an Intellectual Pattern of
> >> Value and exists quite comfortably at the Intellectual level.
> > 
> > Well, if you want to reject Pirsig's correct "container logic", who
> > am I to stop you.
> > 
> >    "You can't have Box "A" contain within itself Box "B," which in
> >    turn contains Box "A." That's whacko." (By courtesy of Pirsig)
> 
> Could it possibly be that what RMP was referring to is your attempt to
> turn the intellectual level into SOL was the condition described
> above? Sounds more like it. It is indeed whacko to try and contain the
> intellectual pattern MoQ, that is prior to, or the source of subjects
> and objects, on a level that can only contains subject and objects.
> 
> Relook at is carefully Bo,that is probably what he was really saying.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> 
> 


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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/