From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Fri Jul 25 2003 - 16:06:10 BST
Brian ...
My brief mail to Bo and Rick, on the intellectual level just crossed with
yours ...
One line jumps right out of yours and suggests we're on the same tack ...
[Quote]
Is the MOQ an absolute truth?
.... currently leaning towards "no".
[Unquote]
My point - pragmatic but not absolute truth.
(whatever that is / if such a thing could exist).
Ian
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
[mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]On Behalf Of Brian Taylor
Sent: 25 July 2003 14:54
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Subject: Re: MD What does Pi.... mean by *static intellectual patterns*?
Greetings Pi, Bo
> > I have been reading the posts for a short while now but have noticed
> > that a large number of people have trouble understanding what Pirsig
> > meant by 'static intellectual patterns of quality'. And honestly, it
> > is hard. Pirsig did not spend too much time explaining what he meant
> > by it. I personally took about 2 years to completely draw a boundary
> > around this thing called the intellectual pattern. Part of the whole
> > problem of intellectualizing intellectual patterns is that when you
> > try to draw a line around it, you have to draw a line around the line
> > drawing process!
>
>I could not agree more about the trouble with understanding the
>intellectual level (Q-intellect I call it). The MOQ hinges on it.
>
> > I don't even know if
> > Pirsig even had a purpose, but I certainly felt very peaceful after I
> > understood what intellectual patterns are.
>
>I think those who search, search for recognition of what we vaguely
>feel blocks our way. It may be vague to the extreme, but one
>immediately recognizes it when someone points to it, even in different
>words, and if that person not only affirms the blockage but points to a
>path ahead it's bliss.
Recently I have been contemplating the MOQ in general, and mostly in this
context of blockage and breaking through to understanding.
ZAMM seemed at its heart to be a simple and clear answer to the
subject-object dilemma, and an extension of this answer gives a new simple
and clear point of view on life. Upon first reading ZAMM, I was very
intrigued by this Quality idea, and yet I also knew it was right. But as you
said, ZAMM was vague at really getting to the meat of what this all actually
meant.
Lila, on the other hand, is critical look into what this Quality really is,
where we get this subject-object division, and how we can break through this
division to a more complete understanding of life. However, as it is a
critical look into these ideas, it must make extensive use of the
Intellectual level itself, and so, as Pi eloquently put it, "you have to
draw a line around the line drawing process [itself]." Something about this
whole process never quite sat right with me. It didn't seem to "just click"
like the obvious Quality issues brought up in ZAMM. I initially chalked it
up to a kind of un-understanding; I needed to let it sink in, look at it
myself and see where exactly I stood with it.
At first, it all seemed to make sense, but it didn't change anything for me.
I did not so much look at the world differently, or live my life
differently, or actually change anything about my behavior or understanding.
Every once in a while I would think "oh hey, that's like what Pirsig was
talking about with..." but it was as if I was merely an observer of a
process I had nothing to do with. To put it simply, the MOQ has not changed
the way in which I live my life. However, this is exactly what Pirsig is all
about. In ZAMM, he states that he considers a philosophy only as good as it
will affect everyday life (although I suppose this is debatable as to
whether or not it was Pirsig [Phaedrus] or the narrator [somewhat the
antithesis to Phaedrus]), and so I do not know how useful the MOQ actually
is to me.
Contrasted with the simple Quality idea presented in ZAMM, which I
immediately understood, and could immediately apply in everyday life. "Does
what I am doing right now, this instant and in my life, have Quality?"
contrasted with what I am beginning more and more to think is an obfuscation
of this topic, "How does this action fit in with the static patterns of
value of the intellectual level, and am I progressing towards some kind of
Dynamic Quality that will further this endeavor?"
Which brings up another point (perhaps for another time, but oh well): The
ZAMM Quality is something that we can actively pursue. Dynamic Quality seems
like an intellectualization of this Quality, and becomes hard to search out,
because it is now strictly defined, even if that definition is "change which
cannot be statically defined." I find it hard to base my actions on a
"Dynamic Quality" because, to tell you truth, deep down as a human being, I
don't really understand what that means. Intellectually I can understand it
in the scope of the MOQ, but outside of this context, it suddenly has no
meaning to me. A human being is more than just an intellectual static
pattern of value, we are comprised of, and also comprise to a certain
extent, all 4 levels of the MOQ, and so an intellectualized concept of
Quality cannot apply to our entire humanity.
So my ultimate point is, is the MOQ a subtle byproduct of Quality, that is
useful for Pirsig and some others, but perhaps not useful to all? Is the MOQ
an absolute truth?
My ideas at this point in time (subject to change within the next few
moments) are currently leaning towards "no", because the MOQ appears to me
to be entirely an intellectualization, and thus is effective or even
meaningful at all only in the context of the intellect level, because it is
purely a product of this level.
But hey, Pirsig himself said something similar to this in Lila when talking
about the immorality of building an intellectual metaphysics around the
concept of Quality. Already with this message I have fallen into the same
trap, I believe :).
Brian
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
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
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 : Fri Jul 25 2003 - 16:08:04 BST