Re: MD Intellectual level - New letter from Pirsig

From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Fri Oct 10 2003 - 20:40:51 BST

  • Next message: David MOREY: "Re: MD the nature of value"

    Hi

    Good last point, philosophy has dropped
    out of education/society/politics yet
    we are so dominated by s single metaphysics.

    regards
    David M
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Mati Palm-Leis" <mpalm@merr.com>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 4:24 AM
    Subject: RE: MD Intellectual level - New letter from Pirsig

    > Paul & MOQ folks,
    >
    > I think the term that has been used before is lurker, which I am not
    > totally fond of because of the social malfeasance that is implied. I
    > guess benchwarmer might be more appropriate. I have been reading over
    > the past three months with great interest this discussion/debate about
    > the Intellectual Level. My personal interest revolves around a possible
    > interest in writing a doctorate thesis with MOQ as a foundation to build
    > an educational leadership paradigm. Nothing of great significance yet,
    > however the process defining the Intellectual Level is a critical
    > component. I have tended to stay on the sidelines while the heavy
    > hitters go at it. It has been interesting to stay the least. With
    > Pirsig's new letter I have also read with great interest and thought I
    > might share a few comments before returning quietly to the sidelines.
    >
    > Upfront I would like to thank Paul for sharing his letter. I understand
    > his concerns about having done so. I am reminded in LILA when Rigel
    > takes a crack at Phaedrus ideas. Phaedrus stated that he should have
    > seen it coming. I suspect Pirsig would understand the critical comments
    > and expected them as a part of the MOQ "Celebrity" status he is.
    > Personally I share your warm regards for Pirsig thoughts and comments
    > and I also believe that he has made some important contributions with
    > this letter.
    >
    > The first contribution of the letter that I see it is that he does not
    > have the magic answer. It seems he has thought about this for sometime
    > and has not committed to any definition or rational for defining the
    > Intellectual Level. I am sure if he had a committed rational that would
    > have helped he would have given it to us. Also he seems fairly
    > comfortable in us trying figuring it out on our own.
    >
    > About three weeks I asked an Art Teacher/Friend and philosophical novice
    > the following question, "Is Art Real, and if so how do you know?" She
    > shot back, when Louis Armstrong was asked "What is Jazz" he replied,
    > "Man, if you gotta ask you'll never know." We laughed and I loved her
    > answer and it made even more sense when Pirsig made the comment that he
    > was annoyed originally being asked what the intellectual level is?
    >
    > As to the importance of defining the intellectual level, simply put for
    > myself it will promote a greater understanding about reality of the
    > intellectual level just as MOQ has redefined the reality we have come to
    > understand. As to Pirsig comments regarding Zen, I find Zen is a great
    > mirror of what MOQ isn't. I have my doubts about Zen Buddhism being the
    > stepping stone to the understanding of the intellectual level, but
    > having said that I hope Pirsig is right about the reality of the
    > definition lies in those of us who are intellectual. :)
    >
    > Next on my mind is Pirsig statement, "When getting into a definition of
    > the intellectual level much clarity can be gained by recognizing a
    > parallel with lower level." Thank you DMB for your comments on this
    > subject. Agreed "something more" is what we are trying to understand
    > and the values patterns that define it. Whatever the answer for what the
    > intellectual level is, it should be a value pattern that can be easily
    > delineated for the other three levels, and yet easily understood how the
    > intellectual level is related to the three levels. Not an easy task but
    > I think an important one.
    >
    > Finally I would like to thank Bodvar for his very important comment of
    > his on 10/6 "At times I wish we would heed the point about a child
    > understanding the Quality Idea and forget about these out-of-this-world
    > definitions of intellect." One of the great tragedies of the SOM is
    > that it has relegated philosophy to something that has little value and
    > meaning to people lives and yet plagues it in so many ways. As an
    > educator in the field I see it everyday. It is my hope that we can
    > further the discussion that everybody can understand.
    >
    > Take care,
    > Mati
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > 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 Oct 10 2003 - 20:42:33 BST