From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Mon Dec 15 2003 - 07:44:33 GMT
Wim and All.
13 Dec. you said to Mark:
> Your answer is clear. My answer is different: Pirsig's MoQ and Bodvar's MoQ
> are both (recognizable as) variations of 'THE MoQ', which is a pattern
> (which is in the process of migrating towards DQ) and not a rigid set of
> ideas determining who 'belongs' and who doesn't.
Thanks for your good words. I interpret it that you don't see any
BoMOQ. I have suggested a different definition of the intellectual
level that's all, one that fits better what Pirsig actually have written
about it in ZMM and LILA ...than his later definitions, but for some
reason Mark has made this into some offense.
Regarding the abbreviation "Q-intellect" I have repeatedly said that
it just means "the static intellectual level of value" and having
nothing to do with whatever interpretation one subscribes to, but it
does not penetrate. We have seen many such during this
discussion; IntPoV, SIPoV ...etc. but Mark did not object - not until
he got me up his throat.
However, the finest part of your message was this:
> 'THE MoQ', which is a pattern (which is in the process of migrating
> towards DQ) and not a rigid set of ideas determining who 'belongs' and
> who doesn't
It reflects exactly what I mean by the MOQ as some development
beyond intellect's static frame. Thanks again Wim.
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 15 2003 - 06:45:29 GMT