[MD] Pirsig's revenge

[skutvik at online.no]

Horse, Marsha, Andre, All.

Horse said 
> So why is it that you've done nothing to provide Craig with the 
> ammunition to stop Strawson in his tracks?
> According to you, the SOL will make his criticism irrelevant - to me
> it is and always has been irrelevant, regardless of your input - and
> yet you have failed to rise to the challenge.  

You remind me of Ron, however much I explain he will just require 
more. Strawson's argument is that there is no SOM, and from SOM 
seen there certainly is no S/O metaphysics, it's only from MOQ's 
higher ground the metaphysical context is visible. No level knows the 
Q context thus a "movement" above will be regarded as corruption of 
own value while the lower "movement" is something to be suppressed. 
OK, now turn to the SOL interpretation where the 4th level = the S/O 
distinction..   

And further turn to the social - intellectual relationship where the 
former regards intellectual value as corruption, the most striking 
example is Islam (social value totally fossilized) that regards intellects 
objective approach a corruption hence Al Qaeda and terrorism. Now, 
SOM is intellectual value just as fossilized and will look to a movement 
above itself - the MOQ -  as corruption, and most of you act as 
intellect's "martyrs" to keep the MOQ within intellect's bounds. 

Now, the MOQ is no static level rather the system which regards 
existence to be this value level increments. But for that to happen the 
MOQ must "escape intellect", that is: SOM must surrender its "M" and 
accept the position as the highest static Q level. As long as the MOQ 
is an intellectual subset SOM rules unscathed. 

Anyway, this is is the argument that Strawson can't counter unless he 
become an "intellectual terrorist". I recommend Craig to bring this to 
the lecture. Of course it can't be delivered on "the spot" but  must be 
left for Strawson to ponder.  


Marsha said to Andre:

> I think the quote I provided points to the fact that all philosophical
> explanations of Quality are difficult and tend to be complicated, and
> personally, it's for this reason that I agree with Bo that the
> Intellectual Level is the SOM level and that there is an emerging Quality
> Reality above.

You bet it's complicated. Any "from the hip" answers are next to 
impossible. As said it's not every day a new reality is born. It may be 
compared to a modern day person (intellectual level) being 
"transported" back to the Stone Age (social level) and (after having 
learned the language) were to explain the present day reality to the  
Horses, DMBs, Andres, Rons, Magnuses ....phew! Only a single 
Marsha seeing the light ;-)    

Andre:
> > Hi Marsha,Horse. Contrary to Bodvar I never postulated a level that
> > claims that, 'to make your relationship succesful you have to beat your
> > girlfriend'. (to use your example Marsha)

I don't propose any static level, but that the MOQ is the reality that 
contains the levels and thus can't be contained by any of them, one 
must be a  .... (censored) not to see that. 


Bodvar