From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Wed Dec 24 2003 - 10:23:57 GMT
Sam and All Focussers.
22 Dec. you wrote:
> Bo wrote (18/12):
> The Subject/Object divide naturally, what else?
> Sam: Let's not go too far into this, just to say that S/O has no independent relationship to Quality
> or value either - and as such can't be a natural analogue to the atom or the gene IMHO.
The MOQ does not see the atom as holding some special position
in the inorganic realm other than carbon being the vehicle for DQ's
inorganic-biological transition, and genes did not play the "carbon"
role in the biological-social transition and in the social-intellectual"
transition language was the "carbon" ...I believe we agree on.
So I don't quite see the common value of your atom-gene-tribe-x
list. Are these entities supposed to indicate the basic building
block of each level? The atom is so ...on earth, but at the center
of the sun the atom is not stable, and life on Proxima Centauri may
proliferate by other means than genes. The social pattern however
can take no other form than organisms grouping together, and here
the tribe may be the basic entity.
But you want them to be the "choosing units" of their respective
levels, and your thesis is that the "autonomous individual" is the 'X'
of the intellectual level? Is that so?
> Bo: Watch out Sam or you'll be accused of creating a different MOQ and asked to call it something
> else (which means "remove yourself") ;-)
> Sam: I freely confess I've "created" (adapted?) a different MoQ. I've called it the eudaimonic MoQ
> to differentiate it...
Our minor adjustments, don't count much compared to Pirsig's
achievement. Accusations of separate metaphysics is because the
accuser don't understand the first thing of the MOQ ...its break with
SOM. The sacrilege in questioning the intellectual level is because
intellect for those has taken the place of SOM's mind and the least
thing they want is go out of SOM. The intellectual level is no more
or no less than the rest of the static sequence, but do I spot the
same tendency with you ... of wanting intellectual value to be
some "injection" of spirit into matter?
> Bo: Intellect's value is that of rising above emotions, just as societys value was rising above
> instincts.
> Sam: Don't agree with that, in fact it's precisely what I object to. The idea of intellect being
> 'above' the emotions is, IMHO, incoherent - that's precisely why I object to the RMP account.
The very kernel of the levels' rise out of the former is their
dependency upon the parent ...that the lower level's values show up
in the upper. Pirsig zooms particularly in on intellect's illusion of
being independent and points to scientists may want to manipulate
experiments to obtain status, celebrity, i.e: social value inferring in
intellect's business. Society's dependency upon Biology is even
more prominent ...as is Biology's on 'Inorgany'.
NOTA BENE!! In the said example above intellects S/O value
(objectivity-over-subjectivity) is plain to see, so plain that I wonder
how anyone can avoid seeing it. Just as obvious is emotions as the
social "expression" and reason as intellect's, and in light of the
dependency issue one sees emotions' role as what underpins
reason. Why you consider this aspect of the MOQ as imperfect is
very strange.
> As
> Damasio says, 'It does not seem sensible to leave emotions and feelings out of any overall concept
> of mind'. From the point of view of integrating this with the MoQ, I would argue that 'emotion'
> cannot be reduced to either the biological, the social, or even the intellectual level. It is a
> combination of all the different parts of human being.
If anything makes sense in the MOQ it's the upper level's
dependency upon the lower and the said intellect/social in
particular. This with the reason/emotion scheme on top of that fits
like the proverbial hand and glove. Damasio is right, but it is the
SOM that has this problem not the MOQ, this because SOM is the
intellectual level as it sees itself, it's from the "Q-level" we see the
quality context)
> It would also be true to say that the
> intellectual level depends upon the social and biological for both existence and proper functioning.
Agree, but as intellect is dependent upon society and society on
biology, intellect is dependent upon biology - by proxy.
See you all after the holidays.
Bo
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_focus/
MF Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/mf/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Dec 25 2003 - 11:45:23 GMT