Re: RE: MD MOQ human development and the levels

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Wed Jun 04 2003 - 17:19:38 BST

  • Next message: August West: "Re: MD Free Will"

    Hi Scott, Steve, All:

    > I've found it useful to see the distinction between social and intellectual
    > levels in my own thought, rather than in externals. Social level thinking
    > is that which is driven by social concerns, and is not much under my
    > control. What Buddhists call monkey-mind. On examination, one can usually
    > see that it is driven by fear, greed, anger, etc. It is the "when he said X
    > I should have said Y" kind of internal monologue.
    >
    > Intellectual level thinking is, then, thinking for the thought itself. What
    > scientists or philosophers do when they are not influenced by dreams of
    > Nobel prizes or tenure, or sounding good in a discussion group. Or what
    > anyone does when they are being mindful
    >
    > Intellectual thought is autonomous thought -- driven by the thought and not
    > the ego of the thinker. (Ego, as I see it, is a social level phenomenon).
    >
    > In practice, since the intellectual level is young, the intellectual
    > thought is rare and when present, mixed in with the social (e.g., a thought
    > sequence can start on the intellectual level but soon gets overwhelmed by
    > social concerns.)

    Interesting view of social vs.intellectual levels. Makes me wonder if we
    shouldn't look at all levels as interior phenomenon since the MoQ rests on
    a foundation of observers being a necessary catalyst of reality. Steve has
    championed the interior world with good effect I think, and one way to
    kill off SOM for good is to rule out objectivity completely and admit once
    and for all that everything we think, know and say about the world is
    located somewhere between the ears.

    Just read this morning of a new book out by F. H. Buckley entitled "The
    Morality of Laughter." Although restricted to social level ethics, the
    author makes a good argument. As the reviewer writes, "His larger purpose
    is to supplement the dry rationalism of modern life with the aesthetic
    grace that laughter encourages. Any ethics worth its salt helps us not
    merely to live morally but to live well. 'We might,' Mr. Buckley urges,
    'follow all the Commandments and still be dull, priggish and pretentious.'
    Laughter is a tonic antidote to these vices. It is also, Mr. Buckley
    notes, the companion of joy and 'of all things, the ability to find joy in
    life is our chief earthly good.' "

    The MoQ should be about finding joy in life as much as explaining how the
    world works. I've often thought that the line near the end of Lila --
    "That's a good dog" -- kinda put a joyful spin on the whole serious
    business of doing metaphysics. Likewise, when Pirsig wrote, "Getting drunk
    and picking up bar ladies and writing metaphysics is part of life," he
    gave us a touch of "aesthetic grace."

    Now to find more humor in my own interior musings, something I find rather
    difficult on a day to day basis. But, worth the effort I'm sure. :-)

    Platt

       

    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 Jun 04 2003 - 17:21:41 BST