[MD] Pirsig's theory of truth

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Ian

8 May:

I had said:
> > SOM destroyed Aretê in the ZAMM context because it (SOM) was
> > Quality's only fall-out there (called "intellect" FYI) You can't be
> > as rigid as DMB who insists on ZAMM being a reality of itself
> > unperturbed by the MOQ, but nothing exists outside its static range
> > and in such a retro-translation it's plain that it ZAMM describes
> > intellect's emergence from society*). To portray an historical era
> > as all Quality-steeped is impossible, that goes for a group
> > "teaching Quality", it can only be taught in the form of the MOQ.

Ian:
> [IG] Frankly, I barely understand that paragraph ... and the personal
> intentional rhetoric puts me off even trying ... but here goes:
> "nothing exists outside its static range" you say .... isn't that my
> criticism, that you are statically encasing (all) things including the
> MoQ. Help me here.

Could I just bring across that the SOM - Aretê event was some static 
level shift we would be half way to our moon landing. Regarding   
"statically encasing (all) things including the MoQ" I barely understand, 
why you barely understand that the said ZAMM process has to have a 
MOQ explanation. What was it that happened in Greece in your 
opinion?

> > If the Intellectual level isn't 100% SOM it is not THE SOM
 
> [IG] Precisely my point.

> > but a
> > mental container that has SOM at one layer and the MOQ at another
> > and every metaphysics and systems  since God knows when, and this is
> > good old MIND
 
> [IG] Hmmm. Maybe being good, it is irrelevant that it is also old. Not
> retro, but a matter of rehabilitating older conceptions because they
> were better, exactly as Barfield and James and Pirsig were doing.
> Improving on the older conceptions of "mind", clearly, not casting
> them in concrete. One word doesn't "define" anything useful, not even
> "intellect".

Listen, a  world view which has as its basic premises the rejection of  
the mind/matter (S/O) it's a bit "weak" to speak about "improving". The 
MOQ's DQ/SQ throws away both mind and matter  ..... as separate 
realities .....  and IMO introduces them as its own static 4th. level.  

And SOM does not cast "mind" in concrete on the other hand it says 
that mind is the MENTAL realm which means quasi-real and that 
values are mind phenomena. That's the PROBLEM THAT THE MOQ 
DISSOLVES!  Isn't even THAT clear???.     

I understand you want to be the level-headed fellow around this place, 
but "MOQ an improvement" is impossible it's revolution or just more 
SOM.  

> > Besides all levels exists inside that mind-intellect.
> > There seems to be something that prevents you all from grasping
> > Phaedrus' original insight, I wish I knew what that blockage is?

Ian: 
> No idea either. But Phaedrus wasn't 100% right or good once for all
> time either, just a useful step in the ground beneath our wheels, to
> use the prevailing metaphor. It's that static "compulsion" that gets my
> goat. 

Admittedly, Phaedrus (ZAMM) did not arrive at the final MOQ, but he 
arrived at the 100% correct conclusion that the subject/object 
distinction is a fallout of the pre-whatever - and he called it "intellect" - 
so why did not Pirsig follow up in the final MOQ? Well, I know you are 
not the oracle yet ...    


Bodvar