Re: MD What does Pi.... mean by *static intellectual patterns*?

From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Mon Jul 28 2003 - 09:18:28 BST

  • Next message: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com: "Re: MD What does Pi.... mean by *static intellectual patterns*?"

    Scott, Joe, Brian and All

    SCOTT said:
    > It looks to me like this is (in part) an argument over the usage of
    > the word "metaphysics". So (if I'm right) I suggest distinguishing two
    > usages. The first we might call "expressed metaphysics", and the
    > second "underlying metaphysics", and I'll use E- and U- for shorthand.
    >My dictionary only includes the first usage, but the second is, I
    >think, also needed, though it could be expressed in other words,
    >like "underlying sense of reality". But I would like the convenience of
    >distinguishing between E-MOQ and U-MOQ, and E-SOM and U-
    >SOM.

    You are dead right on this issue. For instance, it's naive to regard
    SOM as an explicit description, it was only with the MOQ that it was
    pushed out of obscurity. Now, as the MOQ is presented as a
    metaphysics the argument that it is a description has some virtue, yet
    I constantly catch myself in the Quality world. The greatest illusion of
    them all however is that of those who think it is possible to populate a
    totally featureless (dynamic) world.

                                     ___________________

    JOE said:
    > 40 years ago I studied scholastic philosophy, and the theory that we
    > know things, and create words by abstraction. In ZAMM Pirsig
    >destroys this basis for knowledge by pointing out that Quality is not
    >subjective.

    This time I had no problem understanding you Joe, and what great
    insights did my understanding reveal? (No sarcasm) For the first time
    another person who points to the Quality as not another idealist
    (subjective) approach! So many thinks THAT to be Pirsig's message.

    > In Lila Dynamic Quality is undefined, and for myself I had to propose
    >a new way of knowing things. From postings back and forth it
    >seems that mind, will, and all subjective, objective, differences
    >leads back to SOM.

    YES!!! You see that the lure of SOM in the mind/thinking definition of
    intellect. Great.

    > Following other thinkers, I proposed an instinctive sensing of reality,
    > intuition, as the way we know things.

    My first margin remark in ZAMM is if not Quality is another form for
    Intuition?. One may say that one intuits value so QUALITY remains
    the "mother" of all those unassimilated phenomena that SOM keeps
    in its subjective compartment. Intuition, Aesthetics, Meaning ...and
    many more have been suggested to replace Quality at this forum.

    > 'Existence' is undefined as it
    > encompasses four moral orders in an hierarchy. 'Purpose' as the
    >basis for actions is undefined, as many times I don't know what I am
    >doing. Dynamic Quality is undefined, and is latched into Static
    >Quality for preservation. I concluded that Static Quality is a pattern to
    >which I attach a word, and other people know what I am talking
    >about.

    I don't know if this is relevant, but that the MOQ is presented in words
    is plain enough - language once served Society, now it serves Intellect
    and will certainly serve the Q-movement beyond intellect.

    > The composition of the static pattern is complicated. For the
    >apprehension of Dynamic Quality I have a brain 'intuitive intellect'.

    As said many times by this person: Intellect is now the top level and
    where the action is. So "...brain intuitive intellect" OK!

    > For the apprehension of 'existence' I have a brain, 'emotion'. For the
    >apprehension of 'purpose' I have a brain in the spinal column.

    My take is that SENSATION is the biological 'expression' (I call)
    EMOTION the Social and REASON intellect's. Regarding Purpose it
    is another of those "unassimilated" phenomena, much related to
    Meaning. Another form of Quality.

    > Words are composed of undefined aspects of 'existence', 'purpose',
    >dq, latched into an sq pattern. For the manipulation of words into
    >sentences etc. I have a DNA generated awareness field with
    >memory, similar to a gravity field around a planet. A 'sentient' is a
    >self-aware being who has an instinctive sensing of reality, intuition.
    >My instincts can be trained to optimal function by education, for a
    >fuller participation in society.

    I must digest this ;-).

    > Abstraction leading to subjective, objective experience, SOM is
    >flawed. Pirsig proposed a MoQ but he did not explain a way of
    >knowing the undefined, only that we do.

    This is splendid re. SOM's flaw, look to the similarities in this I (once)
    wrote.

    * The reality young P. was born and raised in was the SOM. He
        pressed it to the limit and found inconsistencies, that shocked
        him and by and the by the Quality insight came to him: There is
        an even GREATER reality that spawns the S/O and the reason
        SOM is inconsistent is its secondary nature. Now enter the
        MOQ. All static value levels are secondary to the DQ and
        examined closely they also show inconsistencies. No-one will find
        where matter ends and life begins, nor society's departing point
        from life, nor the society-intellect "fault line". This last was what
        shocked Phaedrus. When examining the SOM he found no truth
        only opinion ...which is exactly what the MOQ says about
        intellect. It's "out of society"

    Thanks Joe I thought you were inscrutable.

                                    ________________________

    BRIAN ended his piece thus:

    > 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?

    Byproduct? I would say the end-product from the raw Q-ore.
     
    > > Is the MOQ an absolute truth?
     
    The way I interpret "metaphysics" Yes!. In its time Social Reality was
    truth, then came the Intellectual Reality which makes us ask the way
    you do. Social era people surely knew the difference between telling
    lies and being honest, but did not have the sinister "absolute " quality
    that came with the SOM. The Quality Metaphysics will in some far
    future constitute reality and thus truth.

    Honestly (!) Bo

    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 Jul 29 2003 - 00:10:38 BST