From: Scott Roberts (jse885@localnet.com)
Date: Wed Nov 16 2005 - 17:28:47 GMT
Bo,
Some obvious objections:
Bo said:
Different premises can give rise to different conclusion without
logic itself being faulty. I should have used "subject/object
premises" to delineate the intellectual level.
Scott:
This would make all philosophers (except Descartes) non-intellectual, since
philosophers are those who question premises. I think you have a valid point
that most people most of the time act as if S/O[1] were true, that that is
their premise (what philosophers call the "natural attitude"). There is also
a valid point (shared with Barfield) that intellect and S/O[1] dualism arose
together (that S/O makes intellect possible in human development). But it is
also the intellect that can question the natural S/O attitude, and has, and
has proposed different premises, and can lead us out of the natural S/O
attitude. The MOQ is only a recent example of this questioning and attempt
at replacement. Thus I think you could justifiably say that the S/O[1]
premises are the basis of the fourth level, but it is silly to call it the
intellectual level. Intellect has the capability of transcending all levels
(all premises).
Bo said:
To expand logic itself is hardly possible but shifting premises
(that logic uses to arrive at conclusions) is possible, and my - um
- logic is that the different Q-levels can be regarded as different
"premises".
Scott:
Which puts logic outside of all levels, which must make it part of DQ.
Bo said (to Rebecca):
Yes you are right, SOL says that S/O is the 4th level's premises,
thus MOQ's DQ/SQ premises is something beyond, and for
goodness sake Rebecca the 4th level is supposed to be STATIC.
The tendency to regard it as a mental compartment where an
endless succession of ideas fights for the top perch is
inconsistent with anything static.
Scott:
Isn't the word for "fighting for ideas", which is anything but static,
intellect?
Bo said:
Yes from the said Q-premises which sees intellect for what it
really is: Just another static level.
Scott:
So do you claim that Pirsig used something other than intellect to come up
with the MOQ? Or must we treat the MOQ as revelation?
- 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 : Wed Nov 16 2005 - 18:24:31 GMT