From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Tue Sep 09 2003 - 17:27:16 BST
Jonathan and Group
7 Sep. you wrote:
> BO:
> >It was Jonathan, but I may have misunderstood. He said:
> >"I don't see the S/O divide as a social pattern.
> >It is an (intellectual) description of perception AT ALL LEVELS."
> >..and it looked like one among many intellectual patterns, but I now
> >see that he means intellectual instead of social. Will wait for
> >Jonathan's reply before further comments. JONATHAN AHOI!!
> I'm not sure what you are waiting for from me. My world view?
Yes, please ..in due time :-)
> Here is my take on the intellectual, in a nutshell:
> The issue is of how discreet patterns are discerned from what we
> assume to be a continuum of reality. Clearly this involves primary and
> secondary waves of perception, that build up to what you and I would
> call an (intellectual description). You might choose to resolve this
> into a primary preintellectual process (direct experience?) an
> secondary abstraction process.
OK, but this sounds what all thinkers before Pirsig (or oblivious of
him) has said. "Intellect" is the usual mental/mind vessel where ideas
slosh around. But enter the MOQ where intellect is something else
than mind (in the same way that the inorganic level is something else
than matter)
Thus "intellectual description" is reality describe from the intellectual
level, no great revelation that, but intellect is not a mind realm, rather
the value of separating the abstract from the concrete. What is
described in ZAMM as pre-intellectual and gives rise to the
subject/object reality is the intellectual LEVEL of the MOQ, but there
are three more levels where no such division exists!.
Your primary & secondary waves ...etc. is good as gold, but there
must necessarily be a similar pre-social and pre-biological process,
even pre-inorganic and overlooking this seems to be a (bad) habit at
this site. When you wrote:
> >"I don't see the S/O divide as a social pattern.
> >It is an (intellectual) description of perception AT ALL LEVELS."
...it looked promising at first. You don't see the S/O as social and that
makes it intellect - I hoped(!) - but "...an intellectual description of
perception at all levels" sounds like everything is intellect!? As if there
were no inorganic, biological or society realities before intellect, only a
diffuse pre-intellectual "continuum". I am aware that Pirsig wrote the
MOQ, but a METAPHYSICS molds everything in its shape, and within
that shape inorganic reality was followed by biological ...etc, upwards.
My view, if you have missed it (:-) is that the MOQ is a "rebel"
intellectual pattern from where these contexts are seen, most of all
from where intellect is taken down a few pegs from being MIND to
being the S/O divide. Not where "description of perception at all
levels" are performed because intellect is the SOM and doesn't
recognize the MOQ and its level system.
Sincerely
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 Sep 09 2003 - 17:28:16 BST