Bo and All,
I definitely agree with you when you say that we interpret MOQ in similar
ways. I agree with you at heart about your SOM=Q-intellect level, it took me
a while, but now I'm a believer. The one reason why I'm not too keen on
going down that road though is the platypus phenomenon. By making it about
the classification system instead of the world that it's classifying, we
could be regressing. As an engineer, I'm a firm believer that the universe
exists and we interpret it rather than vise versa. That being said, just as
a mammal is warm blooded and doesn't lay eggs, SOM is the intellectual level
of static quality. Which definitely implies that MOQ is the beginning of a
fifth level of static quality, but we'll see about that. I contend that it
has to take hold of society before it gets to that point.
Experiences. Now that's a topic that needs some discussion. Experiences are
how we immediately "see" quality in real time. The feeling we get from
something that is high quality, however, depend on the level of our brain
from which it is interpreted. Physical pleasure being the experience of high
quality biologically speaking, the amazing feeling of the "Jesus
experience", by doing a selfless good deed, is a high quality experience
socially speaking and the "eureka" experience intellectually speaking. All
of these experiences are high quality in and of themselves though. Here's
the thing though, it's hard to have a constant "eureka" experience for one's
whole life. One has to settle for milder high quality experiences over the
course of ones whole life. You can't expect to be happy all of the time, but
a long pleasant life is surely enough for most people. Besides, you only
need one eureka experience to improve one's life if that experience, like
MOQ, sets a framework for analyzing and improving one's life in terms of
quality of experiences. For all you math people out there like me, a formula
for maximizing the area under the (Quality Experience)/time curve.
Ok you wrote:
>Yes, that's it. An "encounter" with DQ that may lead to anything
>new MUST have its base in Intellect - the religious/yoga, sex and
>drug exercises won't.
Indeed, but in order to start a new train of thought outside of static
patterns, one needs external inspiration. Like a muse for a writer or a
something that triggers beauty in a painter. To leave the developed static
patterns of thought, it helps to have something from outside that thought
pattern to think and wonder about. Something like pondering the ancient mind
benders: If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is there to hear, it does
it make a sound? Akin to that are the transcendental experiences which can
be good if they lead to the MOQ static thought pattern.
Pheadrus is a very interesting character. A man who lost all static
patterns for a long time, considered by the flawed SOM definition, to be
insane. Being apart from all static patterns, though, he found his own
static pattern out of the experience of reality. By having his mind opened
for so long, he actually saw a new construct of the universe, something
prevalent in everything. He had a hint though, from his time in the east,
and their acceptance of quality. It made him curious, being from the west,
but he didn't breach the cultural divide until later. If he had never given
up his old static patterns though, he never would have seen the new one. I
personally think that people are too keen to cling to static patterns.
Because of that, they fear what is outside the static pattern, and sometimes
ignore it. A perfect example would be death itself, thinking about death is
considered a bad idea in our society because of the outside SOM
implications. The solution: avoid all conversation about it, "objectify"
those dying and never even think about "subjective" death. Hardly an open
minded way of thinking.
As long as the transcendental/Religious/Drug experiences are not ignored
for the same reason and are incorporated into the MOQ metaphysics, we can
really put this metaphysics to the test. I'm confident that MOQ is based in
reality and that our interpretation of reality is accurate enough that it
can be done. So why limit our analysis to the confining limits of SOM, when
these limits don't even exist for MOQ? The topics that are off limits are
the weak points in a metaphysics, let us expose these weak points instead of
hiding them, because we might even be able to tweak the model and have it
fit reality better.
You wrote:
>Agree! Phaedrus' experience was outside the predominant SO
>Metaphysics, but ........follow this idea: SOM's emergence from
>the - then - "predominant metaphysics" (which IMO was the social
>level) was just as "unreasonable". Inertia will be overcome
>eventually.
I hope that the inertia will overcome. I truly do.
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
[mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]On Behalf Of skutvik@online.no
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 3:09 PM
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Subject: RE: MD 5th level revisited
Rob and All
You wrote:
> Hmm I see your perspective about the yoga staring into the sun idea,
> but I disagree. You see the rejection of all other level of
> experience for it, certainly a bad idea, but I don't think you see
> the quality in the experience itself. Although you don't believe it,
> I do believe that there definitely is a connection between MOQ and
> these experiences.
"These experiences". Do you mean drugs and yoga? Maybe yoga
and various "vision quests", but the use of drugs - not in my book!
OK, any mental state is of course induced by some chemicals:
hormones, dopamine, enkephalins ...etc. but injecting such mind-
altering stuff artificially will be damaging - except as a medical
treatment.
> MOQ is the framework which can explain these high quality
> experiences. The experience in and of itself is not as high quality
> as living a rich life full of people, the simple pleasures and
> thinking,
Yes, there is a MoQ explanation for these experiences, but if there
is any gain in pursuing them - by these means - I doubt.
> but if that one experience can make one appreciate these things and
> point one in the direction of improvement, it is high quality. In
> the same way that thinking may not be a quality experience in and of
> itself (you never hear people say "man, thinking , what a high!")
> but thinking can identify what things to do to maintain high quality
> experiences in other areas (eg. biologically and socially).
Fasting and strenuous exercises are means to obtain a mystic
state, even the famous "lovers" made something out of the sexual
act than mere orgasm ...it sounds like a "quest for visions". This is
a much sought-after experience, but my doubt is if it leads to
anything else than a short-lived "experience". (thus speaks an old
man :-)
> MOQ is a
> way of how to think to maintain high quality (productive) thoughts
> that can improve ones life in all those areas.
Yes, that's it. An "encounter" with DQ that may lead to anything
new MUST have its base in Intellect - the religious/yoga, sex and
drug exercises won't.
> Why these yogics are a
> bad representation of the transcendental experience is that I doubt
> that they've ever had one. They know it's out there and are
> attempting to attain it. Once they did, though, they would realize
> that they were fools wasting their time for this experience when
> they could be attaining high quality experiences in their life.
OK, it seems like we agree :-).
> If you've ever seen
> Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, the place where the main character
> was would be akin to that, realizing that he is wasting his time
> when he could be with the woman he loves. That realization is a high
> quality experience, because it drives change. Looking at your life,
> and realizing that you're living it and seeing the quality. Where's
> the connection then? Seeing one's life from the perspective of the
> universe (the cutting edge of reality) could be scary. Seeing
> everything again for the first time. It leaves a person asking, what
> am I? what the hell is really going on here?, wow.
No, I haven't seen the dragon (film/series?), but I think that the
"universal" perspective is intellect at-the-end-of-its-tether, however
for Pirsig it lead to the conception of the MoQ which means that it
has become a new stable level (God, whatever route I take I face
the MoQ=5th level solution) and that we - now - see it as Quality.
ize. Before, from a SOM perspective, it was someting spiritual. Stll
a great experience!!!
> The experience of
> transcendence breaks the intellectual SOM static pattern if it isn't
> ignored. MOQ re-builds the static patterns and some of those
> questions can be answered again. The connection between MOQ and the
> experience of transcendence is that they are both outside the SOM
> static pattern. MOQ however allows for such an experience and SOM
> does not. That is the connection. By being "over and above" SOM, MOQ
> can include experiences that are outside the SOM static pattern.
How do you - Robert - look upon my "Q-intellect=SOM" idea? The
above sounds just like it. All in all I find your perception of the MoQ
very like my own.
> Lets be honest
> here, we (for the most part) all believe in MOQ. But society in
> general has no reason to do so really. What experiences of most
> people are outside the predominant metaphysics? What is the drive to
> overcome the inertia? Only an experience that is outside the
> metaphysics would be enough for it. That is the connection between
> MOQ and the experience of Transcendence. Rob
Agree! Phaedrus' experience was outside the predominant SO
Metaphysics, but ........follow this idea: SOM's emergence from
the - then - "predominant metaphysics" (which IMO was the social
level) was just as "unreasonable". Inertia will be overcome
eventually.
Bo
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:30 BST