Hi Diana and Group.
I have been absent (-minded) and have only read the mail
superficially. I have sketched on a reply to your eminent opening
message where you present a list of quandaries (and possible
answers) re. the BMI subject, but haven't managed to finish it nor
had the time to read the "zombie" piece. Yet, as the Benjamin Libet
experiments were mentioned I know perfectly well what it is about.
This is why I won't address any of the combatants (over the
interpretation of the mysterious aspect of existence) but rather use
your post, which was directed to me, to approach the issue ----plus
answer your direct question in the process.
The mysterious ..the occult...the unexplained! We should know by
now that the MOQ says that it is the subject-object metaphysics that
creates the riddles. The antiquated physics of the old Greeks created
their famous paradoxes which was dissolved by modern physics ....not
solved on their own premises as the Greeks hoped for. And this is
exactly the problem here too: it is the antiquated SOM meta-"physics"
that creates the "zombie" problem. Before modern experimental
technology SOM got away with its subject (mind) inside matter bodies,
and about the eternal separatedness of material particles, no-one
probed exposed brains or executed experiments on proton pairs.
But all this has changed and it has become painfully clear that
something is terribly wrong.
We - the LS - know that it is the SOM that causes the wrong - but
does "science" ? No. Does "philosophy"? Ha! They are the very
stoppers. They think from the old "classical" standpoint because that
is what gives them their present status and celebrity. Imagine the
greek mathematician Zenon (him with Achilles and the turtle) had been
told by the oracles in Delphi that the future would look upon his
grand idea as sprung from false presuppositions? He would not have
been the least amused or interested in it becoming known and see his
fame disappearing.
What I read about Benjamin Libet (in a book mentioned
by Gunn Era earlier on) he sounded an open mind, and the author (the
Dane Tor Nörretranders) also, but my attempt to bring the MOQ to bear
resulted in nothing; yes, he told me (in a letter) that he had heard
about Pirsig and was about to read LILA, but since...nothing. What if
the mysteries that sold the book so well were exposed as false
presuppositions? No, never in the history of science or philosophy
has new ideas come to the fore because of anyone in position has
changed thir mind: only when they are replaced by new people.
Enter the MOQ's version of the experiment. The subject-object
division is gone, left is the DQ/SQ division; the last being the four
levels (patterns or dimensions), that comprise all existence.
Libet's guinea pigs were placed in front of a rotating clock-like
pointer - being wired up to instruments registering their brain
waves - and told to press a button when they felt for it; as
spontaneously as possible. Yet, how impulsive they tried to be, the
instrument revealed an "evoked response" wave 0,3 second BEFORE they
"made up their mind". Something seemed to anticipate consciousness.
In a Q context this is no great deal. A human being is all Q-levels.
Intellectual self understands the task and relays it to the other
levels.The Social self has no objection and withdraws (had the act
been socially improper it would have blocked it). The Biological self
initiates the button-pressing act when it SENSES the most
valuable moment. No signal comes "down" from any mind as SOM
tradition wants it, it's the other way round as the experiment showed
As said the Social self is indifferent and the impulse passes it
unhindered, is noticed by Intellect 300 miliseconds later where it is
falsely interpret as "making up of mind".
Someone will probably object because they see Biology as an engine
room where blind slaves wait for signals from the mind in the control
tower, but this is not so. Biological self is well informed about
physical reality (Inorg.& Bio.). In fact it is the part of us that IS
informed about those levels). We do our best when Biological self
operates unfettered by Social shyness or Intellectual
self-consciousness.
I think it was Fintan who once mentioned the English thinker/writer
Colin Wilson (as a saint!!), nobody has probed deeper into the
mysteries than him and I hold him in great esteem. He has even
forwarded a "ladder of selves" theory that is a little like the
static Q-hierarchy, but lacks the initial metaphysical clarification
and is as such a SOMist. His vocabulary becomes the usual
....deeper levels...unconscious...subliminal. It sounds "deep",
but solves nothing, in SOM there is only the subjective, and even if
one postulates levels by the scores its impossible to come
deeper than the "subjective". While the MOQ has rid itself of that
barrier and everything becomes quite simple. That is if one
understands the MOQ axioms and do'nt approaches the mysteries with
hidden SOM parameters.
I don't say that Lithien or Fintan or whoever are such "loaded", but
what the MOQ has done is to make a solid theoretical framework of
what Zen, intuition and/or true religious insight has known - always.
However it's no use coming to the academia establishment with hunches
and intuitions, you have to present yourself as a representative of
the "theory class". Fintan grandiosely misinterprets the MOQ if it
thinks that the top position relegated to Q-Intellet (not SOM
intellect!!!!) means any ivory tower sanctification. On the contrary;
the very Q-idea is to see Q-Intellect as a mere stage, high but
subordinate to the dynamism of it all, and possibly in the process
of being transcended.
------------------------------------------------------------
Diana, more specifically to your letter: You wrote:
> For those of you who are still listening, I've decided that the
> intellectual level is "thinking" but it is not equivalent to awareness
> per se. Awareness includes the zombie/zen mind/intuitive/dynamic
> awareness, and, for humans it includes social and biological awareness
> as well.
I agree. Q-Intellect is thinking ...as abstraction... but not
equivalent to the awareness or consciousness of SOM (=per se).
This point is very important. Regarding "awareness" I accept your
definition. There may be finer points, but we have the general ouline
clear.
> Intellectually we may be aware of these other awarenesses and we can put
> them into words, ie "I want a cookie", but these are abstractions of the
> actual biological or social awareness.
We are not "focused" in Q-Intellect when aware of biological needs
or urges or of social impulses, but when starting to "think" or tell
about them we intellectualize/abstract it.
> I've forgotten who said it now and I can't face sorting through the
> trash to find it, but someone said that we're getting confused because
> the social and intellectual levels are so deeply intertwined. I think
> this is true and it's because of the way the two have evolved molding
> and mediating each other as they go. The social level appropriates the
> intellectual level for its own purposes. Thus you have ideas which are
> intellectual patterns but which are held for social reasons. If you can
> separate the valuing of the idea in itself and the valuing of holding
> the same ideas as your social group then you have the separation of the
> social and intellectual level. The social level is mostly about
> following everyone else. The intellectual level is any mental
> abstraction of the world, ie thinking.
This is so well put that I need not add anything. Of course,
Q-Intellect and Q-Society are intertwine. People spoke and
thought (socially sanctioned thoughts) long before the Intellectual
level (in a Quality sense) manifested. Language was the social tool
that DQ used as the building block for the next value latch. Compare
it to the inorganic-organic development: The carbon atom isn't life
only particular configurations are. Likewise, abstract symbol
manipulation (language) isn't Q-Intellect; only particular abstract
configurations are.
> The metaphysics of quality is as much an intellectual pattern as the
> SOM; the ultimate reality is mystic. Pirsig is perfectly clear about
> that.
I agree if the "ultimate reality" indicates the whole Quality
picture and not evoke objective reality in contrast to intellectual
as a subjective. There is nothing subjective about the Q-Intellect.
> Philosophers should see themselves as artists painting
> intellectual pictures of reality. So is the SOM the intellectual level?
> I'm still not clear why you, Bodvar, insist on this,
My picture is that the subject-object dualism was the result of
language's abstraction, and it grew into a static value in its own
right: the Q-Intellect . However, the subject-object METAPHYSICS -
the idea that that this split is fundamental - was this level
usurping its position. It is now being rectified.
> but, for the time being, I will stick with the idea that the intellect is
> thought, because I believe that's what Pirsig says, it seems to be the simplest
> explanation and I've yet to see anyone come up with anything better.
Intellect is thought ...also. What you say is fully compatible with
my idea. As said above: DQ used a particular volatile atom to
liberate itself from dead matter; advanced organisms to liberate
itself from the jungle law of life, and the most refined social tool
to liberate itself from communal coercion. If we extrapolate this
will a "movement" beyond Q-Intellect have to be intellectual in
its origin......the most refined abstraction there is!
I see the Q idea to be the first attempt by DQ to free itself from
the dualism of SOM.
Phew, this became quite a treatise.
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 - 16:02:44 BST