[MD] Intellectual Level

[Mary]

Hello Arlo,

> [Mary]
> I wonder how long it's going to take someone to notice that the paradoxes
> should be a red flag.
> 
> [Arlo]
> And I wonder how long its going to take some to realize that "paradox" is
an
> inherent feature of symbolic systems (since all representations of
"reality"
> must contain themselves). Goedel "discovered" this long ago, the Zen
> masters discovered it even longer ago.
> 
[Mary replies]
This inability of conventional subject-object metaphysics to clarify values
is an example of what Phædrus called a "platypus."  

Could we not say "paradox" = "platypus"?

To say that "paradox" is an inherent feature of symbolic systems is my
point; given that, I believe (and correct me if memory fails) you would say
the Intellectual Level is "symbol manipulation".

> [Mary]
> The fact that there are unsolvable paradoxes should be telling us that the
> explanation upon which they rest is invalid.  Is that so hard to see?
> 
> [Arlo]
> No. The fact that some think that they CAN resolve paradox should be
telling
> us something about the SOM-mindset they can't seem to overcome.
> 

[Mary replies]
Exactly!

[Arlo]
> What is "invalid" is the SOM view that paradox can be overcome, that we
can
> build a non-selfreferential, paradox-free "metaphysics", simply by backing
up
> and adding another eye to see the first eye. Those trapped in SOM stumble
> of Pirsig's most basic realization, "all this is just an analogy". They
create an
> endless ladder of eyes-seeing-eyes because they think that this "analogy"
is
> a shortcoming that be overcome by adding more eyes. It can't. And so they
> remain forever stuck in the very thing they think they are condemning.
> 
[Mary replies]
And again ... Exactly!  I am heartened.

> [Mary]
> My sense is that when he 'returned' he brought with him a strong belief of
> having seen something that blows away all the paradoxes.
> 
> [Arlo]
> What he came back with was the understanding that you can't "blow away all
> the paradoxes", that such a fool's quest is what defines the SOM mindset.
> 

[Mary replies]
But after two points of agreement, we diverge, for it is far from a "fools
quest" and is in fact, exactly what the MoQ does.  Pirsig clearly asserts
that the Metaphysics of Quality blows away all the paradoxes, and while
doing so makes it equally clear that the intellectual level (symbol
manipulation) is the cause of them in the first place:

 [Lila]

The low value that can be derived from sitting on a hot stove
is obviously an experience even though it is not an object and even though
it is not subjective.

The value is the reality that brings the thoughts to mind.

What an enigma! it was exclaimed [regarding the discovery of the platypus].
What a mystery! What a marvel of nature!  Even today you still see
occasional articles in nature magazines asking, "Why does this paradox of
nature exist?"  The answer is: it doesn't.

In a subject-object classification of the world, Quality is in the same
situation as that platypus. Because they can't classify it the experts
have claimed there is something wrong with it. And Quality isn't the only
such platypus. Subject-object metaphysics is characterized by herds of
huge, dominating, monster platypi. The problems of free will versus
determinism, of the relation of mind to matter, of the discontinuity of
matter at the sub-atomic level, of the apparent purposelessness of the
universe and the life within it are all monster platypi created by the
subject-object metaphysics.

> [Mary]
> So, he prevaricates.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Well thankfully there are people like you to tell us what he really meant
to
> say, but was incapable of doing so.
> 

[Mary replies]

Happy New Year, Arlo!