JONATHAN ADDS SALT
(try it Bo, it helps once the stinging passes)
>BODVAR FEELS WOUNDED AND CALLS FOR REINFORCEMENT
>BEFORE THE MOQ IS REVISED COMPLETELY.
Hi Bo, reinforcements and Lila Squad,
Bodvar has set himself up as guardian of the MoQ, adjudicating which of
Pirsig's ideas are to be held sacred and which are dispensible.
Bodvar has decreed that the 4 levels of MoQ are not to be tampered with.
On the other hand, he has expressed his disappointment with a passage in
Chapter 24 of Lila where Pirsig equates InPoV and BioPoV with Object,
and SocPoV and IntPoV with Subject. He has also repeatedly dismissed
ideas in ZAMM as preliminary or abortive.
>Dear All.
>First it was Jonathan contesting Pirsig's interlevel conflict,
>and Fintan reviving Jonathan's old complaint about Intellect from
>society, and then his suggestion of a new ranking.
Bo, if we are going to argue this out properly, let's not misrepresent
each other.
1. Regarding Pirsig's interlevel conflict, I pointed out that Pirsig
contradicts himself on this
(see my post of 5th November). I understand that you either don't
understand the contradiction,
or don't see any need to resolve it.
2. I accept Pirsig's structural dependence of Intellect on Society (see
my post of 23rd August). What I argue with is his MORAL ranking of
Intellect above Society above Biology ... (see my posts of early to mid
August).
>The "rescue operation" from various parties haven't improved the
situation
>much, suddenly there are levels all over the place. Roger correctly
>called it a basket of worms.
This is a sure sign of a bad starting place. I wasn't around in the LS
when Doug Renselle produced his scheme mutiplying the MoQ levels, but
from what I saw of it, I wasn't particularly impressed. Division of
reality into levels seems to be necessary for "philosophical work" to
proceed, and I think that Pirsig's Fab-Four turn out to be quite good
working tools, though not a Holy Quaternity.
>Don't you - all - see that if the level sequence is tampered with
>and/or SOM's "thinking itself" is brought in through well-meaning
>back doors, there's nothing special about the MOQ any longer.
Bo, I am now convinced that SOTAQI is actually a MoQ description of SOM.
SOM is so bad at describing itself that the fact MoQ does it better is
hardly a surprise. Describing the thought pattern now prevalent in
Western cultures is not what makes MoQ special. I thought that Pirsig's
mission is not just to describe how we think and act, but to CHANGE it.
If the current structure of MoQ is up to the task then so be it - in
that case it should be resilient to all our attempts to tamper. I am
reminded of an undergraduate computer course I once took when the
lecturer answered almost every question with "try and see". When asked
whether this might damage the system he answered that the operating
system was supposed to prevent inadvertant crashes, and thus any failure
would be one that "the system deserved". If the MoQ can't resist
well-intentioned tampering, then it can't be worth very much.
[snip]
I look forward to the arrival of the cavalry ...
Jonathan
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 - 16:02:39 BST