From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Sat Aug 30 2003 - 08:13:51 BST
Hi Marco.
I should have shown the good sense to keep quiet - but I had to
return to save the MOQ !;-0.
27 August you wrote:
> well, Bo. Nothing new I see! This "another proof" is more or less the
> same reasoning. The usual answer is that the ZAMM Phaedrus saw that
> the subject/object split was not good but could not find a solution as
> he was immersed into the SOM way of thinking. Then ZAMM narrator tries
> a classic/romantic split. In Lila finally he finds the Dynamic/Static
> split.
This was an extremely zipped version - not all correct either. You are
right about Phaedrus being immersed in SOM, but he DID find a
solution in the "Quality the creator of the whole goddamn
subject/object mess" insight. The first attempt to sketch a new
metaphysics from that premise proved to be a dead end, but the fact
remain that the "Intellectual Reality" box splits into a Subject/Object
realitiy stands firm.
You also know so well that as Pheadrus operated at the SOM "level"
all talk about pre-intellect translates directly into pre-SOM,
consequently the intellectual level of the MOQ corresponds to the S/O
divide. The indications are overwhelming, but some prestige forbids
people to admit it ;-(
> Anyway, as you ask me for the disagreements we had in the past, here
> is what I can remember, in few points:
> 1. BO: language is the social/intellectual interface.
> M: it is the biological/social interface. Rituals are the
> social/intellectual interface.
I noticed this point in your post to Matt, but what about "rituals"?
According to Pirsig Aretê/RT/Quality amounts to the same thing so
saying that rituals is the social/intellect interface is correct enough, but
it is the interface between all levels. Some atoms do the ritual of
connecting to create ...whatever.
You also said to Matt:
> a) the learning of language depends on the complexity of the biological
> creature b) we learn the rules of language through a SOCIAL trial and
> error process
That language requires (biological) vocal chords is no great news;
everything at the upper levels require the whole lower spectrum. And
that language is a social pattern I also hold to be true, but this does
not rule out the fact that it was what DQ used to reach intellect ...the
same role that carbon played for biology.
> 2. BO: The intellectual level starts with the Greeks (Plato and
> Aristotle).
> M: The intellectual level starts with the prehistoric rituals,
> that
> trigger self-awareness, that is a necessary condition for any form of
> intellectual freedom from social dogmas.
OK call it "rituals". That intellect started as a social pattern I hold as
selfevident, also that it may have "simmered" within the social reality
for tens of thousands of years, yet it is when it started to challenge its
parent which is important.
> 3. BO: The Sophists represent the social level, while Plato and
> Aristotle represent intellect.
> M: At the contrary, the Sophists were the beginning of an
> (aborted)
> intellectual revolution, while Plato and Aristotle represent the
> reaction. SOM was born as intellect slave of the social level. That's
> why it is not equipped for this era.
Take it "piano" Marco! In ZMM Socrates and Plato represented the
SOM while the Sophists represented Aretê (or RT or Quality) Now,
enter LILA and the MOQ where it is plain that SOM becomes Q-
intellect and the Sophists representatives for the level that Intellect
grew from, namely Society.
Everything points to this interpretation, God, if there is something that
supports the SOL it's this: The TRUTH (objectivity) that Socrates died
for stood out against (subjective) SOCIAL OPINION that the Sophist
(by rhetorical means) were out to manipulate. You may invent strange
theories, but the sole purpose seems to be of NOT agreeing with me
...phew!.
> 4. BO: MOQ, the q-idea, is the beginning of the fifth level
> M: There is no fifth level. MOQ is another intellectual pattern
> of
> values.
I have modified the 5th level to a "rebel" intellectual pattern ...one that
may have to hatch as long in intellect as IT hatched in society ...at
the speed things develop here ;-).
> finally...
> 5. BO: intelligence, aesthetics, art, thinking, inspiration are not
> static. They are DQ.
> M: more simply, they are *names* - intellectual terms- we use
> when we
> try to describe the intellectual activity of exploring DQ.
Yes, this I agree with for a change.
> Well, Bo, I must go. Unfortunately, I'm still very busy so I don't
> know if I will be able to continue this thread. Anyway, as said,
> nothing new.....
See you soon.
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 Aug 30 2003 - 08:24:10 BST