Re: MD Dealing with S/O

From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Mon Sep 22 2003 - 18:28:42 BST

  • Next message: David MOREY: "Re: MD A metaphysics--Resignation"

    Hi

    Can someone post up the bit in Lila's Child
    that puts mind on the fourth level please.

    Thanks
    David Morey
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: <skutvik@online.no>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 10:36 AM
    Subject: Re: MD Dealing with S/O

    > Scott
    > On 19 Sep.you wrote:
    > > [Scott prev:] I think I agree. I also think that Coleridge/Barfield's
    > > metaphysics is the one I need to work with, and not Pirsig's.
    >
    > Bo prev:
    > > >Too bad, but just for curiosity's sake, is there a Coleridge/Barfield
    > > > metaphysics? If so what is its first postulate?
    >
    > Scott now:
    > > Yes. The first postulate is that all that is, is as a result of "two
    > > forces of one Power", called "free life" and "confining form". Sound
    > > familiar?
    >
    > Yes it sounds familiar, but is there an identification of a S/O
    > Metaphysics? And is there a new metaphysical opening starting with
    > something - like Value in the MOQ - that the "free" and "confining" are
    > aspects of, except a power? And is there a hierarchy of "confined
    > powers" starting with "confined inorganic power" ...and so on
    > ...ending with "confined intellectual power"? And how does
    > (Coleridge/Barfield?) define this last one?
    >
    > I was disappointed by your statement that the C/B metaphysics is the
    > one you need, and not Pirsig's, still hope it wasn't all serious.
    >
    > > [Scott pre prev:] In any case, my interest is in the mind. Pirsig puts
    > > the mind as the fourth static level.
    >
    > Bo prev.:
    > > He did not ..put the
    > > mind as the fourth static level until Lila's Child.......etc.
    >
    > Scott now:
    > > I think I agree with others that, though he did not explicitly say so,
    > > he nevertheless considered mind as the intellectual level while
    > > writing Lila, i.e., his explicit statement in LC is consistent with
    > > Lila. Nevertheless, I agree (as I have been expostulating in other
    > > posts to Paul, Platt, and DMB) that the treatment of mind and
    > > intellect in Lila needs work. However, I would also say that the ZAMM
    > > picture also needs work, to be provided by the logic of contradictory
    > > identity.
    >
    > Needs work. Right. I have a post almost ready to the MD where I
    > propose a solution to all differences over the intellectual level. I am
    > particularly interested in your reaction, so keep an eye open for it.
    >
    > 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
    >
    >

    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 : Mon Sep 22 2003 - 19:19:47 BST