Hi Jonathan.
You said: (14 Jul)
> Bo, I think we are on the same wavelength - nobody else seems to
> understand what I don't like about the intellectual LEVEL. I don't
> deny the existence of Intellect per se, but I find enormous
> difficulties in giving it its own level.
Great!
> But Bo, I do see the virtue of SOLAQI. I think SOL is a very large
> part of intellect. SOL, as the main component of rational thought is
> clearly the major player in the construction and analysis of the MoQ.
> However, I think that there is more to reason than that. I've often
> said that one can follow a logical/dialectical thought process all the
> way to absurdity. However, we have an inherent ability to look at the
> product of logic and say "that just isn't reasonable" (which is why
> people are good at picking up massive computer errors!!!).
.... S/OL (subject-object logic) a large part of Intellect .. main component of
rational thought ... but there is more to reason than that". This brings things
back to exactly square one. Intellect becomes the "Random Access
Thought" realm that may contain various ideas ...and after some more
brainstorming it dawns that it in fact contains EVERYTHING. I clearly
recognize this our age-old quandary that pops up at regular intervals.
I am as said dead tired of pointing to this being the STARTING POINT of
the MOQ. Pirsig called his new point of departure "Value", but I agree with
you that "Meaning" may be as meaningful - "Nirvana" isn't bad either -
inspired by Scott I jokingly suggested "Bias" - the point is (and now I am
dead serious) that it becomes a metaphysics of whatever people figure the
innermost reality (To Killerblade it would be a "Bollocks" :-) Yet, Quality is the
best.
Bo
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:26 BST