From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Thu Dec 19 2002 - 22:43:00 GMT
Dear David B.,
You disagreed 15 Dec 2002 16:59:54 -0700 (in another thread) with combining
the idea 'that ritualistic religion serves socially pattern-dominated people
to see DQ'
and
the idea 'that Intellectual truths are derived from social level rituals and
so come after them'
into
the idea that 'for those on the brink of participating in the intellectual
level, (religious) rituals point to intellectual truths and beyond, to
Dynamic Quality itself'.
Pirsig wrote in chapter 20 of 'Lila':
'Celebrity is to social patterns as sex is to biological patterns. ... This
celebrity is Dynamic Quality within a static social level of evolution. It
looks and feels like pure Dynamic Quality for a while, but it isn't. Sexual
desire is the Dynamic Quality that primitive biological patterns once used
to organize themselves. Celebrity is the Dynamic Quality that primitive
social patterns once used to organize themselves.'
So truth is the Dynamic Quality that primitive intellectual patterns (which
I interpret ritualistic religion to be in this context) used and use to
organize themselves.
'Looks and feels like pure Dynamic Quality' can be summarized as 'points to
Dynamic Quality'.
Please keep in mind that I define the social and intellectual levels
differently than you do. 'To move a person from the social level to the
intellectual level [being] a job for the Universities' implies a definition
of the intellectual level which is much more restrictive than the one I use
and which is hard to square with Pirsig's idea that 'rituals may be the
connecting link between the social and intellectual levels of evolution'.
Why do you think that 'it's simply not the function of ritualistic religion
[to be one of the possible ways to] enhance our cognitive development toward
the intellect'? It may have been THE original, historical function of
ritualistic religion and it may still be a function it has in the
development of some people.
I agree that 'static religious forms ... are not designed to move a person
from the social level to the intellectual level'.
I agree mainly because they are not designed, but develop in an evolutionary
way. At the social level rituals are simply copied as habits 'because' (but
not consciously motivated as) doing so gives status and re-inforces the
social pattern of value and the group that is held together by it. At the
intellectual level (being a connecting link they function at two levels)
rituals are primitive 'symbols, created in the brain, that stand for
patterns of experience'. At that primitive level 'design' is not the right
word for their being 'created in the brain'. A scholastic theologian like
Aquinas probably WAS designing liturgies in order to 'move the soul', but he
used -and needed- quite a lot of words (and not only rituals) to do so. In a
sense his theological writings provided 'signposts' guiding people
participating mainly in social patterns of value through participation in
static religious forms like the Eucharist towards higher quality
intellectual patterns of value. Because of such theology the Eucharist
'points to' higher quality intellectual patterns of value and because of
mystical religion using such theology as 'stepping stone' even beyond that
to DQ itself.
I agree partly because a person doesn't 'move from the social level to the
intellectual level' (in the way I understand MoQ levels), but participates
in both social and intellectual patterns of value once he/she is 'born' into
that level (starts experiencing that type of patterns of value).
With friendly greetings,
Wim
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 : Thu Dec 19 2002 - 22:43:34 GMT