From: Paul Turner (pauljturner@yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Tue Jun 03 2003 - 11:58:21 BST
Hi Steve
> Could you explain how you classify patterns of
> value?
Sure, I'll have a go, you will find combinations of
dictionary definitions, my comments and favoured
Pirsig quotes.
----Inorganic patterns of value
Objects, something perceptible by one or more of the
senses, especially by vision or touch; a material
thing.
This reality is ultimately a deduction made in the
first months of an infant's life and supported by the
culture in which the infant grows up.
Also, the supersensible world studied by Quantum
Physics.
----Biological patterns of value
Of, relating to, caused by life or living organisms
Matter that has been configured by DNA.
Any of the faculties by which stimuli from outside or
inside the body are received and felt, as the
faculties of hearing, sight, smell, touch, taste, and
equilibrium.
Emotions.
----Social patterns of value
Of or pertaining to society; relating to humans living
in society, or to the public as an aggregate body;
social interest or concerns; social duties; social
status; social meaning
Institutions such as family, church and government.
----Intellectual patterns of value
The collection and manipulation of symbols, created in
the brain, that stand for patterns of experience.
An idea, concept, or thought representing a specific
experience - biological, social, or Dynamic - but
stored in memory (not just biological memory, e.g.
books) as an abstraction from the experience.
The symbol can then be manipulated in its own right
without specific reference to the experience that
created it. Intellectual realities are constructed
from the symbols by making generalisations,
assumptions and associations.
Laws, ideals, principles, geometry, mathematics,
philosophy and so on emerge from the manipulation into
complex patterns of symbols. (An idealist would say
that so do rocks, trees, water, light and everything
else in the universe. The MOQ says something similar)
Especially, how do you
> distinguish a social pattern from an intellectual
> one in general?
In general, I see a social pattern of value as a
specific group of people, the UK Labour Party, the MOQ
forum members, the Roman Catholic Church, the United
Nations.
And they all hold ideas and principles which are at
the intellectual level.
A couple of examples to show you what I mean.
I see 'science' at the intellectual level, but
specific scientists at the social level testing out
ideas (intellectual POV) by observation at the
biological and inorganic levels and gaining approval
for the ideas at the social level.
Another example is that of 'the law'. The law is an
intellectual pattern of value describing the rules of
a society. They are enforced by social patterns of
value such as the police and the justice system. The
law provides principles for punishment, but the
specific judge passes a specific sentence to a
specific criminal.
I think confusion between the levels can arise because
many intellectual patterns of value are general
symbols for specific social patterns of value e.g.
communism, family, religion.
See the distinction - intellectual:social,
communism:the communist party, family:the Peterson
family (your family), religion:the Anglican Church,
every other religious organisation.
Also, culture is sometimes considered a synonym for
society, but I think it is best to think of culture as
social patterns of value and intellectual patterns of
value together. The culture then becomes a
relationship between the 3rd and 4th levels. The
intellectual level wants to proliferate ideas and
explanations of experience to further evolution, the
social level filters out the patterns that threaten to
destroy or undermine its favoured belief system. The
section in Lila on the cultural immune system covers
this.
The social level, acting immorally, decides which
ideas should be accepted and believed - is the earth
flat or round? - thus 'common sense' is established
and maintained. The MOQ is not part of the 'common
sense' of the UK.
An aside -
I think the MOQ forum (a social pattern of value)
often tries to understand the MOQ (an intellectual
pattern of value) by assimilation, that is, the ideas
that the forum has are firmly held and filter out the
ideas of the MOQ. The ones that fit with other ideas
are kept, the ones that don't are filed away. From my
point of view, I can be honest and say that this was
what I did for a long time and in doing so never
really understood the MOQ. I only accepted something
if I found a similar idea in another book or from
memory. You think it is adding clarity but it is not.
Once I was aware of doing that (you can literally feel
your mind doing it!) I read the books again without
turning to anything else for approval and saw how
obvious and brilliant the MOQ really is, and the
magnitude of what Pirsig achieved, he literally had to
leave the mythos. It's very difficult to do and I'm
struggling to maintain the understanding I have.
Explaining it makes it harder as well as you try to
put it into 'your own words'.
I think this is what Squonk rails against?
End of aside -
The social level is also the mediation between
concepts and the senses. Believing is seeing. Read the
section on the 'green flash' and the dharmakaya light.
I hope this clarifies the way I see the levels, if not
I'm afraid I can't explain it any other way right now.
I'll now duck before I get intellectually shot down
:-)
cheers
Paul
__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience
http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/yplus/yoffer.html
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 : Tue Jun 03 2003 - 11:59:06 BST