From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Wed Jul 30 2003 - 07:29:40 BST
On 28 Jul 2003 at 20:30, SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com wrote:
> 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.
This is from my message to Brian, but Squonks disgust is so great
that he isn't able to say so, but having behaved of late I'll answer.
> sq: Absolute truth is not dependent upon subjects or objects.
I don't know why he keeps harping on "subjects and objects" as if it
has anything to do with me? I have suggested the intellectual level as
the VALUE OF the subjective/objective divide. Please get this
straight!
> Absolute
> truth is rational - it's a ratio, proportion - geometry. There are no
> subjects or objects here. Absolute geometric truth is intellectual
> art, an aesthetic, and aesthetic is an appreciation of Quality.
What is said here may be correct but has no bearing on the SOL
issue. I have wondered why Squonk picked me out as the great evil
and I have arrived at the conclusion that he wants intellect to embrace
everything beautiful and noble, f.ex. the human search for beauty in
geometrical proportions, mathematical truth(s) and art.
This requires an "intellect" which is as old as the universe itself
because it is inorganic nature (via DQ) that has brought these
harmonies forth in the first place and in that case Pirsig should be the
target because MOQ's intellect is a STATIC level and as such subject
to all the limitations of the rest of the static sequence. As always
Squonk means INTELLIGENCE, a phenomena that - along with
aesthetics, intuition purpose - are different aspect of (perception of)
Quality ...in my opinion.
I noticed this for Platt.
PLATT:
> > > "Finally, though it may be argued that a metaphysics that incorporates a
> > > central term that isn't defined (i.e. Dynamic quality) isn't a real
> > > metaphysics, it can also be argued that the strength of the MOQ is its
> > > ability to incorporate the indeterminate divine within a coherent and
> > > logical paradigm."
SQUONK:
> > Really quite superb. This is my whole outlook on the MoQ.
True, but the indeterminate divine can never be part of any static level.
"The MOQ identifies religious mysticism with Dynamic Quality" (p 381)
> Proving truth using the geometric method does not involve subjects or
> objects.
Correct! But why direct it my way? I have never said otherwise!
> The two are not related. However, one may claim to be able to
> use geometric method to give an account of social quality - arte,
> which is ridiculous, but impressive. (Aristotle's mean applied to
> ethics for example.) That's a bit like saying Keats is better than
> Milton on the basis of geometry.
Agree ...to the extent I understand.
> So, let us be clear - truth does not involve subjects or objects.
Agree about subjects and objects, but Q-intellect is all about
OBJECTIVITY. About distinguishing between what is (subjective)
opinion and scientific, objective, provable facts. The highest good ever
only subordinate to DQ itself.
> Truth is rational, and rationality is an artistic creation of the
> human intellect. Simple!
As always this unholy mix-up of the STATIC intellectual level and
intelligence.
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 : Wed Jul 30 2003 - 07:31:12 BST