Sun, 27 Sep 1998 
Glen (>) wrote to Jonathan (>>) 
> Greetings Jonathon, Squad,
 
> Jonathan B. Marder wrote:
> > Let me first state that the whole of MoQ (or any other metaphysics) is a
> > pattern of the intellectual level which it contains. This is what gives
> > the intellectual level special status. There is an inherent recursion.
 
> While you can use the intellectual level to construct a map of reality, the map
> is never the reality.  The MoQ doesn't contain reality, it's a useful analogy or
> metaphor.  A Word Hoard of the World isn't the same as World. (possibly an
> Anglo-Saxon proverb).  I have always thought that there is fundamental
> discontinuity between the way we describe or model reality and the reality we
> exist in.  There is no description for reality that is reality.  Isn't this what
> Pirsig so deftly defends  against Plato?  It's an analogy, a metaphor, perhaps a
> good one, perhaps a useful one , but while it may be a pattern constructed
> within the intellectual level it will never contain reality.  While you may
> describe the color Red to someone who has never known it, do they really have
> the experience of the color Red?  No they do not.  Most people that have
> experiemented with highly altered states of consiousness understand the futility
> of trying to describe what it was like to someone who hasn't had the same
> experience. It's pointless, it's exactly like describing Red to someone who's
> never experienced it.  Reality is the conveyor of experience, the intellectual
> PoV is the conveyor of maps.  Some would fault me for telling them that their
> description of reality isn't reality but I don't think Robert Pirsig is one of
> them.
 
> I strongly disagree with your recursion analogy.  Recursion is used when a
> function calls itself.  It's a very useful concept in computer programming.  Is
> recursion logical invalid in my program because it's a function calling itself
> in pursuit of an answer?  Does it produce an incorrect answer?  That a pattern
> of reality on the intellectual levels uses tools also constructed from the
> intellecual level to desribe  the environment or reality seems like a good
> classically grounded procedure to me. 
Glen and Jonathan (again) and Lila Squad..
About the map/terrain example. That one is a double-edged 
sword as it implies an objective reality that a metaphysics may or 
may not provide a correct map over (in LILA Phædrus uses the map 
PROJECTION simile which is slightly different), but the MOQ skips 
both object and subject as starting points!
But I do fully agree with Glen in this:
> Personally i've wondered whether your not looking for a solution of what is
> commonly known as the "Other Minds Problem".  "How can I know (in the strong
> sense of the term know) that anything outside my mind exits?"  I don't think
> there is a good "classical" solution to this question.  If you are looking for a
> metaphysics that is reality then I wish you luck but think you will have to
> change to find an answer that will satisfy you.  
Jonathan has - in his TV camera example - demonstrated the "idealist 
stance" (solipsism I want to call it) of SOM: mind as the image of 
itself in an unending loop  - exactly what the Quality idea is such a 
great liberation from. And now I hope that Jonathan - by virtue of 
his own eminent example - understands why I so frantically oppose the 
Q-intellect as "thinking itself" idea, and as hotly pursues the 
SOTAQI. 
I believe that Jonathan wants to incorporate the whole 'mental 
activity' into his model of the Q-intellect while I maintain that it 
is limited to SO-logic (REASON). 'Mental activity' at the Social 
level is EMOTION and at the Biological level - SENSATION. That way SO 
becomes a Q-stage, no more no less, and solidly incorporated into the 
MOQ. 
You all know the so-called strong interpretation of Quantum mech. It 
has no connection to classical physics except through a mathematical 
transformation. In all humbleness do I call the SOTAQI a strong 
interpretation of Quality Metaphysics: esoteric, but unassailable. 
The MOQ now needs a safe base from where it can operate unmolested. 
Bodvar
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:34 BST