From: jhmau (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Fri Nov 22 2002 - 00:47:58 GMT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Horse" <horse@darkstar.uk.net>
> Hi Jon
>
> Sorry for the delay - I've been a bit tied up recently.
>
> On 17 Nov 2002 at 9:02, Jonathan B. Marder wrote:
>
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > HORSE
> > And a conclusion is another name for a judgement!
> >
> > RICK
> > Sure. But under Jon's theory, "observation" is also a synonym for
> > "judgment" (since "judgment" = "conclusion" and "conclusion" =
> > "everything").
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > JONATHAN
> > I like it! I think by using the word "judgement", Horse was alluding to
> > (evaluation of) quality (right Horse?).
>
> What else is there?
>
> We observe, we evaluate, we conlude.. We can do nothing else. Our whole
existence is
> spent in judgement.
>
> >
> > If that is so, Rick boils it down to Quality = Everything. How very
> > Pirsigian!!!
>
> And as everything = reality then Quality = reality. Nice!
>
>
> Horse
Hi Horse and All,
I am not understanding "judgement" because of a previous bias. I am not an
original thinker. I am not a scholar. I am a plumber, I put things
together. I have read Persig, Aquinas, Ouspensky, Gurdjieff, Dorothy Day,
Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet, Wittgenstein, Frank Herbert and I plagiarize and
use other peoples' thoughts as my own. I have acknowledged this on
moq_discuss.
"The instinctive sensing of reality" is a reasonable statement. "Man is a
three-brained being" (from Gurdjieff) is more controversial.
I put them together this way. Controversial "existence" is experienced by
an instinct-sensing only brain located in the heart, solar plexus, and
genitals. Controversial "purpose" is experienced by an instinctive-sensing
only brain located in the spinal column. The head-brain experiences and
abstracts dq and sq. Words, communication, judgement come from the head
brain for use in the social order. Trust rocks! The feet are made for
walking.
Words about "existence" and "purpose" can only be metaphorical as my
experience of them is only instinctive. I can't prove "existence" or
"purpose." I know I am going to the store. I am a tree-hugger!
DNA generates a field around me which creates self-awareness and directed
attention encompassing the three platforms. "Balance" between the three
brains is difficult. My center of gravity collects around one brain. Bush
is dumb! No, he is ignorant. He ignores things. Don't we all!
When I was trying to put together an overview of the 4 moral orders much was
muddy to me. IMO there is an individual in the inorganic and organic order.
In the social and intellectual orders an "individual" is more troublesome.
Suppose "celebrity" creates the social order from Chimpanzee stock. Mother
Father, Child will not be the same as in organic reproduction. I am either
a father, mother, or child, never all three at once in a manner of speaking.
An individual cannot encompass the limits of the social order. No one is
social.
The dynamic creating the intellectual order for me is impossible to
identify. I use Maggie's "packaging" and I envision an automobile as a
manifestation of the intellectual order. When I operate a car I train my
instincts differently. My self-preservation instinct is different, as
Maggie mused. IMO music is another way to train my instincts differently.
IMO an individual is never alone in the intellectual order! If I am never
alone, I am not an individual.
War is contradictory to the intellectual order. "Do what I say or I will
kill you!" intervenes at times of possible evolution to the intellectual
order. For example, Alexander the Great, the Crusades, the Inquisition, WWI
& II, War against terorism, intervene in times of possible intellectual
advances. The intellectual order is partially stillborn. A great
achievement the splitting of the atom was placed at the disposal of the
social order. The "package" is not delivered. "Balance" is not achieved!
The Brujo is killed! The intellectual order is very lopsided. I indulge in
argument! hardly an intellectual order endeavor. Argument is more
characteristic of trust in the social order, than of certainty in the
intellectual order.
Deconstruction of a "package" seems to be "pouring from the empty into the
void." If I state in my scientific formula that 1+1=3, thinking of a
family, I can be thought of as incorrect. I have to be more careful.
joe
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 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 22 2002 - 00:42:34 GMT