From: Valence (valence10@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Nov 25 2002 - 16:03:16 GMT
Hey David and Maggie,
Thanks for the responses....
PIRSIG 1
For purposes of MOQ precision, let's say 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.
PIRSIG 2
In the MOQ all organisms are objective. The exist in the material
world. All societies are subjective. They exist in the mental world.
Again the distinction is very sharp.
RICK (from last time)
Quote #1 clearly states that "the intellectual level is the same as
mind". Yet, quote #2 states that "All societies... exist in the mental
world." Unless there is some meaningful difference between "mind" and
"the mental world" then these two quotes taken together would add up to
saying that all societies exist in the intellectual level. Yet, that
obviously can't be right given the very design of the static levels.
The most frustrating part of this is that in both of the quotes Pirsig
claims he is acting in the interest of precision (a sharp distinction).
Anybody care to try and reconcile these quotes?
DMB
I think you ought to check your math, because the two quotes do not
add up to what you say they do. The mistake comes in assuming that only
one or the other can be in the mind, but Pirsig says that both are
mental, both are subjective, both are part of the mind.
RICK
First, my math is just fine. He says the intellectual level is
the same as mind. Then he said ALL societies exist in the mental world.
Now unless, "mind" is different then "the mental world" then that quite
clearly adds up to "all societies exist in the intellect".
Second, I have no idea what you're responding to when you say,
"The mistake comes in assuming that only one or the other can be in the
mind..." I made no such assumption in my post and can't see why you
think I did. It is Pirsig who seems to claim that intellect is
synonymous with mind. There's nothing in my post that sounds even
remotely like what you're saying, so I fail to see how that particular
thought is relevant.
Finally, while Pirsig does imply that both levels are "mental" and
"subjective" in the second quote, the first quote very clearly states,
"the intellectual level is THE SAME AS mind (emphasis added)." He does
NOT say, as you claim, that intellect is "A PART OF mind". He says it's
"the same as". There's nothing wrong with reconciling the two quotes by
saying that Pirsig misspoke in the first one, but you should at least
admit you are rewriting his words. He most definitely did not write "a
part of".
DMB
This is no problem. There is a huge difference between rocks and
organisms. They are at two different levels of evolution, yet they are
both objective and physical. No problem. Same with the social and
intellectual level. There are very important differences, but they are
both in the mind.
The way you've added up these quotes is like saying that all rocks
exist at the biological level, which makes the fallacy quite clear, no?
RICK
But once again David, you've ignored Pirsig's own words when he says
"Intellect is THE SAME AS mind." You say "they are both in the mind."
But one of you must be wrong or else it would be like saying "the
intellectual level and the sociological level are both a part of the
intellectual level". To use your analogy, it would be like saying "the
biological level and the inorganic level are both a part of the
biological level"... which makes the problem quite clear, yes?
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MAGGIE
I think pirsig did know what he was talking about, and it's not a
mistake. Human societies have been forever changed by intellect. Once
the intellectual patterns came into static existence, they created new
SOCIAL patterns, so many and so vast that we can barely find examples of
the once-pristine, unmodified social patterns in human society.
RICK
Are you saying that intellect is the same as mind and all
societies now exist in the intellect? Are you agreeing that "all
societies exist in the intellect"? Wouldn't this reduce the MoQ to 3
levels? And wouldn't this conclusion completely BLUR the distinction
between the social and intellectual levels, directly in contrast to
Pirsig's claims of increased precision? Have I misunderstood what you
wrote?
thanks
rick
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 : Tue Nov 26 2002 - 00:10:59 GMT