Re: MD A Brief Proposal for a 5th Level

From: Joe (
Date: Thu Aug 14 2003 - 21:00:47 BST

  • Next message: MATTHEW PAUL KUNDERT: "Re: MD Pirsig, Falck, and Wolfram"

    On 11 Aug 2003 4:40 PM Scott writes:

    On the second problem, I suggest that Pirsig's fourth level is "really" not
    a new level of *static* patterns of value, but actual creativity on the
    third level. So the conflict involved is between static and dynamic, not
    between two static levels. Once an idea (like freedom of speech) is made, it
    becomes another semiotic static pattern, and the conflict between censors
    and free-speechers becomes a conflict between two sets of semiotic values
    (whether laws should favor one or the other). The one with the greater value
    is the one that better promotes DQ, not intellect per se.

    Under this scheme, the Big Shift of 500 BC is that at that point, DQ started
    to move inside people (or people started to be aware of it as inside),
    making them individuals, so that they began to think of themselves as
    creative, and not muse-inspired.

    Just thoughts, not entirely thought out,

    Hi Scott, Matt, Sam. all,

    joe: "the Big Shift of 500 BC is at that point, DQ started to move inside
    people" I agree with you Scott. What you say feels right to me. I agree
    the Big Shift was one of DQ movement inside people, not evolution.

    "Just thoughts, not entirely thought out," I hope you don't mind if I tack
    on some of my thoughts.

    Bo sees the intellect as S/O. I don't know if I have a proper understanding
    of what he is saying, but to me this means that intellect apprehends and is
    a difference between dq and sq. In using words which represent patterns to
    explain that difference sometimes dq is a subject, and sometimes sq is a
    subject. When dq is used as a subject intellect is undefined. IMO the
    social order does not know the undefined as a pattern, nor does the organic

    The orders are present to my awareness. In fact my awareness is such a grab
    bag it can only be spoken of as subjective. I can not be certain of the
    state of another person. The intellect as a pattern is different from
    awareness. IMO awareness is DNA generated. One-celled organics are not
    completely subject to gravity, but have an awareness to seek food.

    IMO the Big Shift of 500 BC is recognizing the dynamic in awareness, not
    that intellect is awareness.

    On a different subject, the attempt to show a connection of a brain to DQ
    can not be done through gravitation, radiation, weak-nuclear, or
    strong-nuclear patterns of forces. On the other hand you do not have to
    appeal to a muse. Morality is real, and we can know the undefined.

    What else is there? IMO emanation is a way DQ can be connected to a brain.
    Is emanation a force of this world? I know the undefined. IMO the
    inorganic order is composed of the undefined elements of the other three
    orders. Somehow the organic, social, and intellectual orders have a center
    of gravity each based on a different undefined element in the inorganic
    order through evolution. Emanation, then, might be a characteristic of
    evolution, connecting a brain with its center of gravity the same as that of
    the order to that order.

    It is difficult to propose an hierarchy of moral orders in an inorganic
    order only. Am I composed only of the inorganic. IMO the inorganic itself
    has an undefined threefold composition.


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Aug 14 2003 - 20:56:52 BST