Bodvar,
Great post. However, you wrote:
"That is why I so much want to:
>
> 1) Avoid treating Q-intellect as "mind" of SOM, but rather...
> 2) See it as freedom from Social value, preferbably...
> 3) Regard it as subject-object logic itself."
This third statement is a reference to your SOLAQI idea, right? I have a
question about the theory.
The MoQ isn't SOL, (I believe your SOLAQI idea states that the MoQ contains
SOL, which I agree with), but RMP states that the MoQ itself is also an
Intellectual pattern. So... if the MoQ contains SOL (as its Intellectual
level) and the Intellectual level contains the MoQ (as a high Q-Intellectual
pattern) then haven't we got a little problem in the heirarchy???
I have always believed that the Intellectual level, while it does "contain"
S/O logic, ultimately refers to an expanded rationality. This expanded
rationality (which I believe is a central theme of ZMM as well as LILA)
accounts for reasoning about matters of value and morality--- which are
quite outside of the boundaries of SOL.
This rationality was explored in the 1950s by the Belgian rhetorician Chaim
Perelman (among others), who I've mentioned before in this forum to little
fanfare. Do you know his works--- they're an excellent
philosophical/rhetorical counterpart to Pirsig on many points. I'll cut
this off before I go further out on this tangent.
It's all Good,
Rick
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:20 BST