[MD] Capitalism: my experience

[skutvik at online.no]

Andre, All

I will answer but due to som eyesight problem (when gazing at the 
screen some "stroboscopic" patterns start to flicker across my field of 
view.) I'm limited to short bouts.  

8 Mar. Van Broersen wrote:

Bodvar before:

> > MOQ's "DQ/SQ" split has nothing to do with SOM's "subject/object" one.
> > Another thing, yes, SOM that have given up on "objects", but it has not
> > given up on "objectivity" - these two must be kept apart - physics
> > (f.ex.) would not keep on making hypothesis and testing them if the
> > objectivity rug was pulled from under them. This is what the SOL
> > preserves.

Andre:
> Clarification please Bodvar;are you suggsting that the importance of
> your SOL lies in retaining SOM's 'objectivity'? A simple yes or no
> will do. 

To this I can answer a simple YES! 

But you also ask for "clarification" i.e. an explanation. Yes, the 
importance of the SOL is to preserve is the S/O DISTINCTION and 
this can only be done by relegating it the 4th. intellectual level, all of it, 
every last bit. The danger  is the false MOQ where "intellect" is  
(SOM's)  mental compartment where all ideas since the Neanderthals 
onwards reside, SOM a rather recent one and the MOQ a still more 
recent idea. In this setting MOQ's rejection of SOM makes the latter a 
lower-order intellectual pattern and Pirsig's "the notion of an objective 
reality being a valuable intellectual pattern" is self-defeating, MOQ's 
rejection of SOM becomes the highest intellectual value. No, the S/O 
distinction must be kept high and dry as the 4th. intellectual level,  all 
of it ...etc.  the MOQ is the Quality Reality having no place inside its 
own static range  ... if logic prevails.  

Bodvar