From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Sat Oct 08 2005 - 08:52:06 BST
Ham essentially.
7 Oct. you wrote:
> I'm glad to have "made your day", but whatever I said to Rebecca about
> your effort to modify the MoQ relates only to your recognition of
> "intellect" as a conscious faculty of the individual self. I'm also
> quite certain that nothing I've said is going to "set the MoQ
> straight", as it is already leaning too far astray of most people's
> notion of what reality is.
I was a little hungry for recognition and possibly read into your
posts more than it said. This is "hangover" day ;-)
> Frankly, I don't know if your SOL metaphysics is compatible with my
> own.
Course, you don't know being obsessed by our own philosophy. I,
on the other hand, agree 99,9% with Quality "dogmas", just am
critical to the way the 4th. level is understood.
> This insistence on categorizing everything into "levels" seems
to me an unnecessary complication of the Quality thesis.
This means that you see the complete MOQ as invalid so I just
don't see what your interest is.
> Yet, here you
> are, steadfastly trying to redefine a level, while the concept (I
> think) you want to get across is not a level matter. (Actually, I'm
> never quite sure what you mean, and it's this lack of clarity that has
> discouraged me from responding to your posts.) As I see it, the
> "thinking individual" is not a level, it's the subjective (conscious)
> awareness of an objective reality.
Right, it was this passage from Oct.5th
> Good point, Rebecca. But it will unfortunately be dismissed by the MD
> group because, as Bo Skutvik reminds us, "Pirsig has rejected the
> 'thinking' intellect."
... that I read too superficially. "Because Pirsig ..." should have
been "in spite of" because it is thinking or MIND (as definition for
intellect) I restist.
> What you may not realize is that I'm not trying to "eliminate"
> Cartesian duality (SOM). Awareness is the modality of human
> experience and, as such, attempting to abolish it is sheer
> foolishness.
Agree, that's why I point to Cartesian duality as MOQ's
intellectual level.
> All I'm saying is that this modality is dependent on a
> primary cause or source that Pirsig's heirarchy of levels doesn't
> acknowledge.
This may be what I call the "intelligence fallacy". You may be
right that Pirsig didn't account for it, but the MOQ allows us to
account for it (something I have done several times) At least it is
its being confused with the STATIC intellectual LEVEL (which is
the said cartesian duality) and has messed the MOQ up.
> Instead it explains reality as a categorized system that
> creates itself and that views man as only an anomalous component.
Man an anomaly? Come on Ham. The human race was the one
capable of - first - bringing the social development up to the stage
of supporting the intellectual one, and then bringing this to the
stage of seeing the Quality stage context.
> Rather than dismiss the conscious human being as a biological anomaly,
> my philosophy starts with self-awareness as the subject, positing all
> reality as an objective "otherness". It's a "subjective" philosophy
> in the sense that sensible awareness is the essential connection
> between man and the Source (Essence). Value comes out of that
> relationship by virtue of the fact that the experience that fills our
> awareness is the "beingness" that we don't possess, yet instinctively
> respond to as "conditional" value. Unless you need to explain the
> metaphysical dynamics or epistemology of existential experience, it's
> really that simple!
> If you're still interested in discussing this concept, you are most
> welcome. However, as I've stated previously, I don't speak in
> patterntalk; so any reference to patterns and levels will be
> "redescribed" (to use Matt's expression) in common English. Simple
> constructive propositions, as opposed to innuendo and long-winded
> criticism, will also be appreciated.
> Thanks for the compliments, Bo. I look forward to further discussion
> with you.
Sorry Ham. I will go on discussing the MOQ and talk
"patterntalk". Your system looks so much what the MOQ is a
liberation from. But why are you such a nice person while us
moqists sound so zealous?
Big hug
Bo
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 : Sat Oct 08 2005 - 09:02:03 BST