RE: MD MOQ and idealism

From: Mati Palm-Leis (mpalm@merr.com)
Date: Fri Oct 10 2003 - 21:52:44 BST

  • Next message: David MOREY: "Re: MD Intellectual level - New letter from Pirsig"

    Bodvar,

    Ok, I am coming off the bench.

    You wrote in response to Paul:

    Right, neither subject[ive] nor object[ive] can be without the other.

    My question: MOQ talks about evolutionary process, where the objective
    reality (Inorganic & Biological) came first. Later with the advent of
    the social reality was the birth of the "Subjective" Reality. Though it
    may have not been recognized as such until much later in the social
    history and perhaps wasn't fully recognized until the S/O split. It seem
    to me that in order to have the subjective reality you must have the
    objective reality but that doesn't seem to be the case in the reverse.
    Can this assumption be correct?

    Bodvar:
    But the point of OUR debate is that the S/O divide isn't valid, the
    DQ/SQ is.

    Mati: Both realities seem valid or might have missed something.

    Bodvar: Thus there are no separate idea realm that gives rise to
    things. Ideas are part and parcel of the S/O aggregate ...which is
    best seen as MOQ's intellect, because there is even an inconsistency
    in the S/O as "...having no connection" and that of being stages. The
    inorganic universe existed for billions of years with no "subjectivity".

    No, the S/O emerged simultaneously as MOQ's intellect.

    Mati: Agreed. I am also correct that "Ideas" themselves were part of
    both the social & Intellectual level? It seems to me that "Ideas"
    itself is not exclusive to mankind. There are several animal behaviors
    that in my mind clearly suggest that animal have "Ideas" yet don't have
    the capacity articulate them and it is not necessary for them to do so.
    This may be irrelevant, except to say that ideas themselves is not the
    exclusive underpinning of the intellectual level.
     

    Bodvar:
    Well, at least you dropped the idea bit, but you see that we are back
    to the logic bend. Within the MOQ INTELLECTUAL framework the
    intellectual level is the last stage, and there one finds the MOQ (DQ
    and all). There is something terribly wrong here.

    This is why I want to see the intellect as the S/O divide ...and the
    MOQ as something beyond ....then (with all screws in place) you can
    say: "Within the MOQ framework." The MOQ can never be
    understood from intellect's premises without creaating
    inconsistencies.

    Mati:
    The analogy I think of is in social level. For me the social level is
    defined by the capacity for social learning. This requires the ability
    to communicate. With the advent of Language the stage was stage was set
    for the intellectual level to break away. I see that much of the
    intellectual level is the S/O divide as the intellectual level. MOQ is
    part of the evolutionary process that further defines the Intellectual
    Level. My guess if the S/O divide had not be recognized MOQ would have
    not evolved. Knowing that, the MOQ the stage is perhaps set that we
    might be able to move toward the the "Budding 5th Level" which I have
    heard about. What is that level about? I don't have a clue yet. In any
    case this has been on my mind for sometime.

    With warmest regards.
    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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Oct 10 2003 - 22:05:36 BST