Gary,
(Here's Pirsig's note again):
"24. In Lila I never defined the intellectual level of the MOQ, since
everyone who is up to reading Lila already knows what "intellectual"
means. For purposes of MOQ precision let's say that the intellectual
level is the same as mind. It is the collection and manipulation of
symbols, created in the brain, that stand for patterns of experience."
Now, to decode the second sentence without the third we would have to
guess what Pirsig meant in this note by "mind". Looking in the
dictionary is of course no help, since the various definitions run the
gamut of subjectivity. But he gives the third sentence. I don't see
anything in there that looks like feelings and perceptions. But "the
collection and manipulation of symbols...that stand for patterns of
experience" sounds like SOT to me.
Further, if Pirsig says that what is traditionally known as "subjective"
comprises the social and intellectual levels of MOQ, then for you to
claim that ALL of mind (by which term you include feelings and
perception) I would ask you to back that up by declaring what is
subjective (which to my ears sounds identical to the word "mind" the way
you -- and not Pirsig in the quote above -- are using it) that is not
intellectual. If there isn't anything, then aren't you the one who is in
disagreement with Pirsig?
Since Pirsig says that he nowhere in Lila defined the intellectual
level, how am I expected to give quotes to back up my opinion that the
intellectual is anything? Instead I base my opinion on what it is by
identifying that subset of mental activity that, though developed out of
the social level, is nevertheless in a position to transcend it and, so
to speak, tame it. I name it reflective thinking, and I think it is
coreectly characterized as SOT, a "standing back" from the patterns of
experience so that one can collect and manipulate symbols that stand for
those patterns of experience. Since that seems to be the criterion for
identifying levels in general, I think I'm on solid MOQ grounds here.
Meanwhile, I see your assignation of all "interior" events to the 4th
level as a complete and utter contradiction of this criterion.
As to dreams and hallucinations, I would classify them based on their
content. So my dreams are largely involved with social patterns. I don't
know about yours.
As to feelings and emotions, I'm still grappling with that question, so
I'll leave that to Bo. Is the "eureka" experience an intellectual
feeling, or is it better to distinguish it, to reserve the word feeling
to socially-inspired occasions? I'm not sure.
Monkey-mind (non-reflective mind, in my vocabulary) I see as mostly
driven by social concerns, but I've gone over this many times already.
You say: "You seem to be implying that only "Conscious thought" is
Q-Intellect?"
Do you mean "all conscious thought is q-intellect" or "all q-intellect
is conscious thought". I've denied the former many times (monkey-mind is
conscious). I would agree with the latter, as long as one is staying
within our normal experience. I think on a mystical level there is such
a thing as Intellect of which we are not conscious, but that is not
germane to the present discussion.
You ask: "Or is it only rational, logical thought is Q-Intellect.
Where is irrational thought? I already asked this question once before,
but it was ignored.
Everyone thinks they are being rational while thinking, so I'm not even
sure one can identify an "irrational thought". So if you say something
that I find irrational, it may be Q-intellect, just (in my opinion) of
low quality.
Finally, there are several points where I disagree with Pirsig (for
example is think his phrase "created by the brain" in the above quote is
unfounded, granting too much to materialist dogma), so I'm not really
concerned with being reform or orthodox. I do think that Pirsig's
distinction between the social level and the intellectual level is
vitally important, but only if one recognizes that the real battlefield
between them is in each individual's mind. The social/intellectual
distinction *within one's thinking* is the difference that makes a
difference. The MOQ emphasizes this. Your internal/external emphasis, on
the other hand, resurrects the platypi that the MOQ has tried to eliminate.
- Scott
Gary Jaron wrote:
> Hi, Bo & Scott,
>
> The two of you seem to me have created your own version of MOQ. A 'Reform'
> Pirsig version. By this I mean that how you classify things as either
> Social or Intellect is in ways that I don't recall from either Zen and the
> Art, Lila or Pirsig's commentary notes from Lila's Child. Could you point
> to Pirsig citations to explain the following:
>
> Feelings are Social
> Emotions are Social
> Q-Intellect is only reflective thinking
> [Where do you place non-reflective thinking, "Monkey Mind"?]
> Eureka thought: not Social but Intellect Level [See Scott way below in the
> original July 29th post which this a reply to.]
>
> You seem to be implying that only "Conscious thought" is Q-Intellect?
> Or is it only rational, logical thought is Q-Intellect.
>
> Where is irrational thought? I already asked this question once before, but
> it was ignored.
> Where is dreams?
> Where are delusions?
> Where are hallucinations?
> Where are phobias and fetishes? [The thinking that a psychiatrist would
> call having ideas that would be classified as being beliefs that demonstrate
> a phobia or a fetish.]
>
> They way I see it there is a continuum of choices available to you. At one
> extreme is a position that Pirsig is wrong. The other extreme Pirsig is
> right and you two recant. In the middle is infinite possibilities of
> variations. I am certain you will place your selves in the vast middle
> zone. [This is of course Null-A analysis. If there was only A-logic, two
> valued logic your choice would be: your 100% right or your 100% wrong. ]
>
> I believe that Q-Intellect is where all of the above is found. Since I and
> I think Pirsig consider Q-Intellect to be the MOQ label for the mind.
>
> Here is my cite upon which I base my beliefs. The following is a copy of
> the recent version of Lila's Child. [Note 24 is Pirsig saying Q-Intellect =
> Mind.]
> -------------------------------
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 : Fri Oct 25 2002 - 16:06:17 BST