From: Joseph Maurer (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Sun Oct 03 2004 - 19:50:58 BST
On 27 September 9:35 AM Scott R writes to M et al.
<snip>
[Scott] There is a more general moral question, though, and that is how we
consider intellect in general, never mind those few who are mystically
inclined. I'm kind of surprised that in Lila and in this forum there is very
little
attention paid to intellect itself. Well, in Lila there wouldn't be room --
it is already a full-length book without going into it, except to make the
valid point that intellect trumps the social, and discussion around it. But
there is no discussion along the lines of "what is intellect", in fact in
LC, Pirsig says he purposely did not go into it, on the grounds that those
who read Lila know what it is. In a sense he is correct, but in another
sense, we don't really know. The unique difference between intellect and
the other levels is that intellect can reflect on itself. That means it can
be self-evolving. It is DQ and SQ all right here available to us to think
about, but nobody seems to care. I find that perplexing.
Hi Scott et al:
[Joe] Intellect is only one pole of evolution. I find evolution itself the
more interesting subject. I envision a sentient equally at a loss to explain
the origins of organic, social or intellectual levels from the inorganic
level. In that sense I have to reject the idea that: "The unique difference
between intellect and the other levels is that intellect can reflect on
itself." I would rather say that there is an increase in self awareness in
the different levels. The ability of an individual of each level to
interpret and manipulate the DQ which forms the level is an example of self-
awareness. The tree exhibits different behavior from the rock? The tree
feeds. It responds to a force beyond gravity. Once three forms of awareness
to examine behavior proper to each is present to a sentient then I envision
a startling jump in self-awareness. Since the sentient is composed of three
different levels, the self-awareness of each is available for consideration.
IMO the moral levels, are present to awareness, and logic and behavior arise
from an awareness of the levels.
[Joe] IMO the self-awareness of a sentient uses only one level at a time as
a source for action until it builds motivations from the other levels. The
individual sentient is capable of being logical and moral from one level,
but is more prone to being illogical and immoral when acting from only one
level. For example the absent-minded professor forgets his umbrella on a
rainy day. He loses his life to pneumonia, while pondering the theory of
relativity. The evidence for the value of increasing motivations from all
the levels is exemplified by some who have built and write about such a
conscious platform. Mechanical behavior (from one level) and conscious
behavior (from a recognition of other moral levels) are possible for a
sentient.
[JOE] I envision individuals having a center of gravity in one or the other
of the levels, and the remaining levels having decreasing influence.
Increasing self-awareness is very important! I am very impressed with Pirsig
using of evolution to moral levels.
Joe
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 2.1.5 : Sun Oct 03 2004 - 19:51:20 BST