[MD] Intellectual Level

[Platt Holden]

Hi Marsha,

I agree. SOM is the level of manipulation of imaginary symbols which are
taken by some to have the same reality as concrete material existence. How
much is missed by this belief is wonderfully exposed in the paragraph you
quoted. The "essence" of the MOQ and reality cannot be captured completely
by symbols, although artists come close. That's why Pirsig posited a Level
of Art above the Level of Intellect, and why the MOQ is written as a novel
instead of doctoral thesis. Unless one is sensitive to what cannot be put in
words, understanding suffers.

Thanks for you most complimentary post. Your frequent challenges to
in-the-box SOM thinking of
many here is always a breath of fresh air.

Best,
Platt





On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:17 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

>
> Greetings,
>
> My interpretation of the Intellectual Level is based on reification (see
> below). The fourth level  is comprised of static patterns of value such as
> theology, mathematics, science and philosophy. The way that these patterns
> function is as reified concepts and the rules for their rational analysis
> and manipulation.  Reification decontextualizes.  Intellectual patterns
> process from a subject/object conceptual framework creating false boundaries
> that give the illusion of independence as a “thing” or an “object of
> analysis.”  The fourth level is a formalized subject/object level (SOM),
> where the paramount demand is for rational, objective knowledge, which is
> free from the taint of any subjectivity like emotions, inclinations, fears
> and compulsions in order to pursue, study and research in an unbiased and
> rational manner.
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------
>
>
>
>
>
> Why Reification:
>
> From a review of the book ‘Buddhism and Science: Breaking New Ground’ .
>
> How do we deal with the complexity of experience? Well, we 'seek and find,
> or project, a simplifying pattern to approximate every complex field ... by
> lumping (ignoring some distinctions as negligible) and by splitting
> (ignoring some relations as negligible). Both ... create discreet entities
> useful for manipulating, predicting and controlling ... [but] may impose ad
> hoc boundaries on what are actually densely interconnected systems and then
> grant autonomous existence to the segments' (p. 108). Even the contents of
> our own consciousness have to be dealt with in this way, resulting in our
> array of fragmented self-concepts, and we just put up with the anomalies
> that arise. Buddhism, he explains, agrees that discovering entities is
> conventionally indispensable, but attachment and aggression arise through
> reifying them, which violates the principle that all things are
> interdependent, and all entities are conditional approximations."
>
>
>
> http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol4/buddhism_and_science.html
>
>
>
> ___
>
>
> 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/md/archives.html
>