Re: MD New Level of Thinking

From: Scott Roberts (jse885@earthlink.net)
Date: Thu Dec 23 2004 - 04:25:15 GMT

  • Next message: Wim Nusselder: "Re: MD Static and dynamic aspects of mysticism and religious experience"

    Steve,

    > What if you tried a Big Self/small self thing? Creativity happens in
    > Awareness or DQ/sq or Big Self/small self relationship. Small self
    > isn't creative, but it is the self we can point to after the fact. When
    > we talk about *a* self we are talking about some set of static patterns
    > with the ability to respond to DQ, but when you think of your own
    > identity it is natural to object to that description since you don't
    > merely identify yourself with small self but also with Big Self to a
    > certain extent.

    I see no need for it. Why place creativity elsewhere? Doesn't that amount
    to saying we have no free will? It should be sufficient to point out that
    the self has no inherent self-existence (that is, it exists solely in
    relation to everything else), and that it exists by negating itself. No
    need to assume some Big Self behind it, for which one now needs some
    metaphysical account.

    >
    > >
    > > A difference between the intellectual level and the other levels is
    > > that I
    > > can only observe the SQ of the other levels, but I can make SQ on the
    > > intellectual level. To some extent I have control of the SQ that my
    > > mind
    > > churns out.
    >
    >
    > The self can refer to many things as Pirsig pointed out in LC.

    If he just didn't want to deal with it in Lila, that would be fine. But he
    does deal with it, and I find the way he dealt with it to be inadequate.

    >
    > The volitional self refers to the intellectual level since rationales
    > for behavior are intellectual patterns. In fact I think that
    > self-awareness is the beginning of the intellectual level.

    The self does other things besides invent rationales. But, yes, I agree
    that self-awareness and the intellectual level are mutual.

    >
    > > Obviously not complete control, in that a great deal of time my
    > > mind seems to be running on automatic.
    >
    > Pirsig suggests that rationales often come after the behavior like in
    > the hot stove example. I've heard that hypnotized people give
    > rationales for goofy things done under hypnotic suggestion. I think we
    > tend to overestimate the control intellect exerts over behavior.

    No doubt. Elsewhere, I have stressed that we are at the beginning of the
    intellectual level, mere babies. But the problem of faulty intellect should
    be treated with more intellect, not seeking it to bypass it for the Big
    Self.

    - Scott

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    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 23 2004 - 04:53:36 GMT