From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Mon Dec 01 2003 - 22:46:34 GMT
Dear Scott.
26 Nov. you wrote:
> If the self is intellect that sees itself (I like this
> characterization, BTW), then to call it SQ is a huge mistake. The
> ability to see itself makes intellect radically different from the SQ
> of the other levels. It's not just another static level.
Intellect as it sees itself is the SOM and of course it is an
ENORMOUS mistake to call it SQ or anything Qish. It is the
SUBJECT self faced with an OBJECTIVE world and spawns all these
mind/matter paradoxes that you have displayed. Transferred to the
MOQ however it becomes the STATIC intellectual level; The VALUE
of objectivity over subjectivity; truth over opinion ..etc.
Me prev:
> > Its epoch began when language turned into thoughts, giving the
> > impression of a subject thinking thoughts. However, a free-floating
> > self is impossible and the moment P. created his MOQ intellect's
> > pompous "self" became the 'S' half of intellect.
Scott:
> Again, if intellect can have a "half" then we are not talking SQ
> anymore.
As said the SOM does not recognize any DQ or SQs, it sees
everytning in the mind/matter light. The Quality context of the S/O as
static intellectual value is seen from a position beyond intellect. And it
is here you and I agree, but you are h-bent on not giving at the doors.
> Nominalism. The "selfless existence" of the biological is how it
> appears to us, who do not perceive the underlying Intellect of the
> particular animal or plant in front of us.
I don't get what mysterious position you speak from? If it isn't the
MOQ why these perfunctory Q-terms? "Intellect of the animals" is of
course biological VALUE, but you won't have any of that :-).
Bo prev:
> > "It" (the self) is not SQ alone! Correct! That's intellect's illusion about itself.
Scott
> So you disagree with Pirsig on this?
As said the SOM (the subjective self /objective world) doesn't
recognize the MOQ, so if/when Pirsig wields a somish view of intellect
I certainly disagree.
OK Scott in spite of finding your sudden anti-moqism a bit strange I
like you for showing that the mind-intellect (which still haunts this site)
is untenable and brings us back to the SOM. As you point out it can't
be a STATIC level at all. However the tragedy is that those who could
benefit from your insights aren't capable of understanding your
reasoning.
See you old pal
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 : Mon Dec 01 2003 - 22:48:07 GMT