http://members.tripod.com/~lithien/Lila2.html
-----Original Message-----
From: Bodvar Skutvik <skutvik@online.no>
To: moq_discuss@moq.org <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Date: Friday, October 23, 1998 2:09 PM
Subject: MD Can SOM thinking be avoided?
Hi, bodvar:
you wrote in answer to my question:
SO -M thinking should be avoided, but not S-O thinking (or logic) . You
will possibly have heard of my idea that subject-object thinking is MOQ's
intellectual level. Accordingly S-O is no evil, but the highest static value
level there is. ........if the M part of it can
be dropped.
i see the distinction now, bodvar.
you also said:
But what about the M, can it be removed?
Up through the ages the thinkers' efforts to overcome the SOM paradoxes has
ended in frustration, because not until Pirsig has a complete replacement
been offered, and only now is it possible to see how Q-Intellect as the top
level naturally tried to make itself ALL OF THE WORLD (So did the Social
level in its time and so did the Biological and the Inorganic) ALL levels
were once the summit from
where reality was viewed!!
yes, i remember Pirsig said as much in Lila, and how all levels tried to
defeat the previous one from which they owed their very existence. he
proposed that our age is one in which the intellect carried to its extreme
position is destroying the very fabric of the society which gave it the
freedom to reign supreme.
you continued:
While the SOM falsely reigned there was nothing outside the subject-object
reality, but now there is Dynamic Quality and once that context is seen the
M drops away: Intellect - however powerful, important and GOOD - is
subordinate to the overall QUALITY.
Conclusion: Subject-object thinking is valuable, it is what makes humans
human
bodvar, have you heard of the latest experiments with monkeys which show
that math may have preceded language skills in humans? it seems that
monkeys can tell the difference between more and less. when given different
amounts and rewarded by following the higher sequence...they seemed to count
from low to high. i thought of two things:
1) women are usually better with language and men with math. i wonder what
that says about our sexes?
2) written language seems to have originated after the need to record
amounts of physical inventory, ie. 10 casks of wine, 23 of oil, etc.
some food for thought,
Lithien
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:36 BST