[MD] Reading & Comprehension

[Mary]

Hello Bo, Marsha, Platt, DMB, Horse, Andre, Steve, ...

I've only now caught up with all the posts made in this thread in the past
week.  They are equivalent to the arguments you can hear between Christian
Fundamentalists and their counterparts.  I Googled for "opposite of
fundamentalist" to find an appropriate word and only came up with something
like "liberal Christian".  

On one side are arrayed the forces of DMB, Horse, Andre, Steve and others
who are the equivalent of MoQ Fundamentalists.  Every word of Pirsig's
writings are to be taken as literally true, without metaphor or
interpretation.  The MoQ Earth was created in 7 24-hour days, and on the
last day was created the Intellectual Level where all thinking resides.  On
the other side are arrayed the forces of Bo, Marsha, myself, and Platt, who
take a more, dare I say, liberal interpretation.

Horse says there was no thinking prior to the Social Level, and quotes
Pirsig to prove it.  Since each level emerges in an evolutionary manner from
the one below, I would like to know where the Social level came from if
there was no thinking to think it up in the Biological?

[horse]
Unfortunately, it looks like you've got it wrong Platt because this says
nothing about "thinking" being a biological function. What he says is that
intellect (thinking) pre-dates science and philosophy. He also says that
inorganic and biological patterns are objects ("Objects are inorganic and
biological values") so how can thinking be an object as you seem to believe?
Can you poke it cook it or whatever else you might do with a lump of
material stuff?

[Mary says]  This is a prime example of the Fundamentalist view.  Of course
thinking predates science and philosophy.  It was thinking that came up with
the Social, and that came from thinking that was going on in the Biological.

[horse]
Pirsig says quite plainly that thinking's historical [replace "historical"
with "biological" and you'll have it right, Horse] purpose was to "...help a
society find food, detect danger, and defeat enemies." and that it
(Thinking/Intellect/Intelligence) is part of the evolutionary process of the
MoQ. That it was prior to intellectual patterns breaking free from
domination by social patterns does not mean that it was not in itself a
separate level prior to the emergence of science and philosophy when it
finally started to break free from the domination of social patterns.
...
This also undermines your and Bo's idea that SOM is the Intellectual level
(what you and Bo would see as science and philosophy etc.) because it
existed prior to these as is pointed out in the above section of Lila -
"....intellect has functions that
pre-date science and philosophy [SOM]". How obvious is that?
So how can SOM be the Intellectual level when intellect, intelligence,
thinking etc. all existed before these were around?????

[mary]
Horse, of course thinking existed prior to SOM.  It existed to ever lesser
degrees in all preceding levels down to the Biological.  I get your point.
You seem to be saying that the Intellectual Level arose as a separate Static
Pattern of Values prior to the emergence of SOM.  I take issue with this.
Have we all not memorized by now the paragraphs where Pirsig passionately
explains how Socrates was the founder of the Intellectual Level?  Do we not
all agree that by definition each level differs from the others by virtue of
what it values?  

[Horse]
Are you saying that prior to around 500BC there were no intellectual
patterns of value? Because _that_ is really what would really be going off
the deep end. [Well, Horse, I guess Pirsig "went off the deep end", then]
Intellectual patterns of value constitute the intellectual level, so either
you are saying that there were no intellectual patterns of value prior to
this time and no intellectual level or you have to admit that there were and
that the intellectual level was very much in existence. [Nope.  Pirsig is
unequivocal about this point - though he is not so unequivocal about
others].

[mary]
Yes. That is exactly what the liberal interpretation is saying, Horse, and
if needed, we can all refer back to Pirsig's discussion of this as it
relates to Socrates creation of the Intellectual Level "breaking free" from
the Social.


Again I see parallels with Christian Fundamentalist vs. Christian Liberal
bickering.  

A literal interpretation of Pirsig will get us nowhere, because Pirsig,
whether by design or not left the door wide open in many of these areas.  It
is easier to interpret the Bible in many instances than it is to interpret
our dear Mr. Pirsig.  

I could once again paste in Pirsig's quotes on the subject of Platt and Bo's
SOM interpretation, but surely we've all read them a million times by now
and this post is too long as it is.  

If you read the Annotations [132? Et al] again, you will see just how
carefully Pirsig has worded his statements.  He is not saying that Platt and
Bo are wrong.  It would have been easy and simple for him to do so.  Instead
he cautions that the SOM interpretation could be confusing to some and
should thus be avoided.  Boy was he right.

I have asked these questions so many times without getting any answers that
I hesitate to ask them again, but this is the crux of the matter.  If you
are going to say that the Intellectual Level is more than "just SOM", I need
ONE example.

Bullying, insults, profanity and bluster is not what I expect.

Thank you,
Mary


Mary