On 27 May 2002 at 11:37, enoonan wrote:
> BO:I think it was
> >Erin who - as the umpteenth person at this discussion - pointed to
> >the impossibility of defining intellect, and my interpretation is an
> >attempt at a definition.
> ERIN: No, I said no one has agreed about what constitutes the
> intellectual level --thus there is no agreed upon definiton.
Hi Erin
Well, whatever way - the intellectual level is impossible to come to
grips with, and this "loose" intellect is the weak link of the MOQ. If it is
supposed to be a STATIC level some limitation is necessary.
> Bo said:
> The "ordinary" understanding of the MOQ is that its intellectual level
> is the realm of ideas, and consequently that SOM & MOQ are
> intellectual patterns. This (ordinary understanding) however makes
> everything intellectual patterns for what is NOT ideas - just in our
> minds, and we are back in SOM's mind/matter quagmire.
> Erin: The MOQ is Pirsig's model. If SOLAQI is based on what the
> ordinary understanding of the intellectual level is and not Pirsig's
> then that just doesn't seem right.
The MOQ is Pirsig's model. Definitely, and I accept all the fundamental
aspects of his fantastic achievement. My SOLAQI is merely a different
definition of the intellectual level, or better: IT IS A DEFINITION,
because there has been none such before. And I feel that it is in
accordance with the heart of the Quality Idea ...with ZAMM. My intense
love affair with that book was because I sensed that it was the first ever
VALID alternative to the subject-object reality, and when LILA came I
soon started to object to the "idea"-intellect, because it spelled a re-
introduction of SOM's mind/matter-universe.
> DMB says:
> Yea, we can have thoughts about what is "out there". This creates no
> problems. Its only natural because the higher levels include the lower
> ones. We need no radical measure to get out of it. We don't want to
> get out of it. We want to be totally embedded in it. The MOQ itself
> even includes SOM, but also transcends it. It does not eject SOM
> completely out into space, it embedds it into a larger system. It
> explains how mind and matter are connected in, again, a matter of fact
> evolutionary relationship.
> ERIN: I completely agree with this. I thought at first SOLAQI might
> be an attempt to show how MOQ embeds SOM which I thought is good but
> if it was a way to dissmiss SOM as the intellectual level then I
> didn't like it.
Yes, SOLAQI is a way to show how the MOQ embeds the SOM ...by
relegating it to the intellectual level. "Dismiss" Why that expression?
The topmost value level is no dismissal exactly.
> Pirsig's next sentence:
> > > Also the
> > > term "quality" as used in the MOQ would be excluded from the
> > > intellectual level. In fact, the MOQ, which gives intellectual
> > > meaning to the term quality, would also have to be excluded from
> > > the intellectual level.
> About which Bo said:
> Here is the very crux: He says that the Quality idea (the MOQ) can't
> be a true intellectual pattern!
> DMB says:
> No. He's saying that IF your SOLAQI were true, then the MOQ would have
> to be excluded from the intellectual level. This is exactly the
> problem with SOLAQI. It doesn't solve any problems. It only creates
> problems, big problems, such as the need for a fifth level.
> ERIN: That was kind of silly. Pirsig disagrees with your idea and you
> interpret it as proof. I agree that statement was directed about
> SOLAQI definition of the intellectual and why it didn't completely
> work, not how it was right!
OK, I admit to silliness here. I so desperately wanted Pirsig's new
definition to be a break with his former statements about the q-intellect
that I took short-cuts.
> Bo said:
> RIGHT! And the new Pirsig annotation shows that he sees this
> fuzziness.
> DMB says:
> I have no problem with the idea of such a boundary between levels, but
> the problem with putting the MOQ at the boundary between the 4th and
> 5th levels is simply that there is NO FIFTH LEVEL in the MOQ.
> ERIN: I would say that SOLAQI is an intellectual level overlaid with
> 3rd level values.
SOLAQI is an amendment to a minor part of the MOQ and as such in
company with the MOQ wherever one places it But ".....overlaid with
3rd level (social) values"....That was a strange statement. Well, any
movement beyond intellect will necessarily "join forces" with the level
below, not exactly "overlaid": In sympathy perhaps.
> MOQ's intellectual level is an intellectual level
> influenced by dynamic quality which may result in a fifth level, time
> will tell. Right now it still a wilderness and who knows if it will
> turn into a garden.
Amen to that.
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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:18 BST