Re: RE: MD MOQ human development and the levels

From: Paul Turner (
Date: Thu Jun 05 2003 - 17:30:01 BST

  • Next message: MATTHEW PAUL KUNDERT: "Re: MD Structuralism in Pirsig"

    Hi Scott

    > I've found it useful to see the distinction between
    > social and intellectual
    > levels in my own thought, rather than in externals.

    I think associating social patterns of value with
    thinking creates a fuzzy distinction between the 3rd
    and 4th levels. To me, it is better to say that
    thought is always an intellectual pattern of value.

    As Pirsig states, if you don’t keep the distinction
    between levels sharp, the MOQ can confuse when it is
    supposed to clarify.

    To clarify my view of the social level, I don't see
    social patterns of value as the groups of bodies, and
    as such, external or objective. But if we try to
    identify social patterns of value today we can see
    specific organisations and institutions that are
    always superimposed on biological patterns, i.e.
    humans. They need them. However, social patterns can
    go on completely separately from specific humans over
    several lifetimes.

    Identifying historical social patterns of value is
    also possible and will not always be linked to
    specific people. Pirsig’s discussion of the Victorian
    social pattern of value is an example of this.

    > Social level thinking is
    > that which is driven by social concerns, and is not
    > much under my control.

    The social evaluation of your thoughts in terms of
    approval is what I would say is not much under your

    > What Buddhists call monkey-mind. On examination, one
    > can usually see that it
    > is driven by fear, greed, anger, etc.

    I would say these are examples of social evaluations
    of biological patterns of value, i.e. the meaning
    given to a biological response in terms of high or low

    Fear, greed and anger seem to be examples of a
    negative judgement of biological quality by a society.

    > Intellectual level thinking is, then, thinking for
    > the thought itself.

    ‘Intellectual thinking’ is like saying ‘wet water’ to

    > scientists or philosophers do when they are not
    > influenced by dreams of
    > Nobel prizes or tenure, or sounding good in a
    > discussion group. Or what
    > anyone does when they are being mindful

    Yes, Nobel prizes and sounding good in a discussion
    group are examples of the high quality that social
    patterns give to status. The ‘approval’ of ideas is of
    higher value than the ‘truth’ of them to a society or

    Being mindful is an interesting one, I think that
    being mindful is at a Dynamic-intellectual threshold
    which tries to ‘see things as they are’ before too
    much intellectual differentiation occurs. You think
    being mindful is the same as being intellectual (in
    the MOQ sense)?

    > In practice, since the intellectual level is young,
    > the intellectual thought
    > is rare and when present, mixed in with the social
    > (e.g., a thought sequence
    > can start on the intellectual level but soon gets
    > overwhelmed by social
    > concerns.)

    I disagree about intellectual thought being rare –
    first, I see that all thought is intellectual and
    second, I think a baby starts thinking from birth or
    possibly before. Along with biological evaluations, it
    is essential in its development and individual
    construction of reality, the social approval and
    disapproval of individual ideas cements the cultural

    A closing comment on the levels - I found that
    Pirsig’s responses in Lila’s Child show how he would
    have spent more time defining the levels with
    precision in Lila if he had known how many
    interpretations and fuzzy definitions were being
    propagated. Clearly, as we are not Pirsig, everything
    we say is an interpretation. But if we want to
    understand the MOQ we can pay close attention to his
    definitions and examples where he does make them.

    To be clear on this, I am happy to change the way I
    distinguish the levels but a criteria I have set for
    my understanding is that it makes the distinction
    sharp, otherwise we lose intellectual quality.



    Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience

    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 05 2003 - 17:30:26 BST