Hi JoVo and All,
Thanks first for your 'Collection of Treasure Pieces'- a great read! I
share your thoughts on Bo's MF contributions:
JoVo:
>I did not refer to any of Bo's contributions and the reason is, Bo, that
I still do not quite understand your SOLAQI-idea, which seems to be
understood by everybody else here, except me.
I too have rarely refered to Bo in my few posts thus far for this very
same reason. Perhaps Marco's request will prompt some of the newbies among
us to look into Bo's position:
Marco:
>I think we can go on discussing for centuries and we will forever on our
>respective positions. Maybe there's no time this month, but I'm almost
>sure this is not the last time we are going to talk about SOLAQI. So I
ask
>everyone interested by SOLAQI to enter the discussion with some questions
>about SOL, MOQ and this possible fifth level.
I spend a rainy Saturday morning reading "SOLAQI: An Inquiry into
Meaning". This is a compilation of some of Bo's contributions to The Lila
Squad:
http://members.tripod.com/~Glove_r/SOLAQI.htm
----------------------------
As Bo is far too modest to allow his SOLAQI idea to dominate this month's
discussion, the "Follower" will now attempt to speak for the
"Evangelist"...
(The following responses have been selected and edited by me, and may or
may not represent Bo's current SOLAQI position, nor his responses to this
month's questions.)
1. What is the Intellectual level?
The intellectual level is Subject Object Logic as Quality(Q-) Intellect
(SOLAQI). (ME)
"Q-Intellect (generally) is the ability of an individual (biological
organism) to view itself as different from other (society) and thereby
give rise to the subject-object intuition which in time grew into the
S-O-METAPHYSICS. [...] According to this idea are "consciousness",
"awareness", "intelligence" and all other mind-evoking expressions
(sedimented from the primordial S-O abstraction) collectively the
Q-Intellect."
(Bodvar Skutvik (Bo) to Lila Squad (LS), June 10, 1998)
"The static intellectual level (Q-Intellect) is NOT the intellect
of SOM. The former is subject-object logic while the latter is
"thinking itself" or "mind". The razor-cut is made in the MOQ
by replacing the S-O division with the DQ-SQ one. After that
everything is changed, no more cutting is needed!!!"
(Bo to LS, December 11, 1998)
2. What are its values?
"Doesn't Pirsig indicate that Intellectual patterns = logical, rigorous,
systematic thinking, like science and philosophy?" (Donny Palmgren)
"He does, and those patterns are Intellectual value, but it will be
tiresome to list every conceivable InPoV individually so with my
SAIOM idea I try to define ALL intellectual patterns as S-O thinking
itself. (perhaps SAIOM should be renamed SOTAQI? (S-O thinking as
Q-intellect)). Can you imagine science without a more fundamental
subject-observing-objects notion, or philosophy without an individual
mind thinking about eternal truth?"
(Bo to LS, May 25, 1998)
3. What are its goals?
"...in spite of being the highest static value, Q-intellect is
subordinate to Dynamic Quality, demonstrated in moments of
ecstasy when self vanishes. Our great fear - losing ourselves -
becomes the highest goal; a strange contradiction that has no
explanation in SOM, but is the most natural thing in the MOQ
(Dynamic Quality is identical to religious mysticism. LILA
p.381)"
(Bo to LS, September 30, 1998)
4. How does it manifest itself?
""There is intellect outside of language" you state. Hmmmm. Perception,
experience, yes. Even intelligence, but the (Quality) Intellect is
dependent upon symbolic language. It IS language in my opinion."
(Bo to LS, September 30, 1997)
"There must have been a time, millions of years ago,
when the proto-humans were little more than animals; living in tribes
and/or families, but without language as we know it, which is to say:
Q-intellect had not emerged! After aeons (for reasons that is a
mystery in itself) the brain's neural complexity had grown to
proportions that enabled them to use abstract symbols that could be
manipulated by rules of grammar. At first it wasn't much, nothing
like SOM's "awakening to consciousness" or the biblical "eating of
the tree of knowledge". Language was wholly "in the service" of
Society."
[...]
"And over the millennia the Social level made use of this new tool to
grow ever more complex structures cemented by the common language
mediated mythology of divine origin and guidance. Yet, language was
like the sorcerer's apprentice; it knew the start formula, but not
how to stop. It facilitated improvements by spreading of knowledge
and thereby prosperity but also something unheard of before: thinkers
who used language to see themselves as independent of their
community's strictures; the IDEA of a subject self of more value than
society (other) was born. If we call it objectivization or
subjectivization is the same; the two are always in step...and the
rest is history."
(Bo to LS, October 2, 1998)
5. Why should Intellectual Level values prevail over Social Level values?
"I would say that consciousness is always SELF-CONSCIOUS and awareness
always SELF-AWARE (a subject different from objective environment) so
if my SOTAQI holds that is Intellect. And it's obvious; Q-intellect always
holds up the worth of individual self (against the diffuse many of
Q-society) and as intellect is our usual point of view; no wonder that
personal worth and integrity ranks high."
(Bo to LS, September 30, 1998)
6. Are intelligence and Intellectual Value the same thing?
"Principally the MOQ's static Intellectual 'dimension' has nothing to do
with smartness, intelligence or ability to think. There are calculating
prodigies who can come up with the most amazing results in seconds, so
their "thinking" is not the least affected even if they are intellectual
AND SOCIAL nitwits."
(Bo to LS, September 17, 1997)
My initial view to Bo's SOLAQI idea is that it clearly meets Pirsig's (?)
criteria that "The tests of truth are logical consistency, agreement with
experience, and economy of explanation." But I'll need more time to weigh
it against the opposition. Either way, I feel that my whole understanding
of the MOQ has suddenly shifted to another level, thanks Bo!
All the best,
Mark
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:24 BST