From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Thu Sep 18 2003 - 08:37:40 BST
On 14 Sep 2003 at 13:01, SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com wrote:
> Note that mind is a term not used in the MoQ - we say static
> intellectual patterns instead.
I found "mind" used at 109 instances in the philosophical part of LILA.
Not bad for a term not used.
> These patterns are in a relationship
> with DQ.
What would I do without your information.
> Skutvik:
> This cuts the whole d..ed Gordic knot clean through!!. Q-intellect is
> the S/O, all of it, every last bit, while the MOQ is the intellectual
> pattern ... ..ambiguous enough for DQ to use it for the escape from
> intellect.
> squonk: Subjects and objects are culturally derived artistic creations
> of the intellect. They are static intellectual patterns of value. A
> better intellectual pattern is the MoQ, with its reference to the Tao
> or DQ. The term Q-intellect is meaningless in the MoQ.
You bet they are, but I don't understand your exasperation over the
"Q-intellect" term, it's just an abbreviation for the "static intellectual
level of value". Will SILOV be better?
> squonk: You do not accept the MoQ.
I have noted a few deviations from Pirsig's words when it suits you.
> squonk: Language is high intellectual value.
If language is "high intellectual value", there must have been a time
(before language) with some lesser intellectual values. What were
these? And when was the social "age" ....if Pirsig's words about
"social" only pertaining to humans are to be observed?
Just curious.
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 : Thu Sep 18 2003 - 08:38:53 BST