Rick and Foci.
The below is is is the only point I find worth discussing in your
criticism now that I finally understand the ethics "problem". If
conventionality is demanded from the MOQ it will necessarily fail. I
think Roger had a similar complaint where he called it "rational
morality" and that says it. IMO the intellectual level is REASON
and "rational morality" - along with your "conventional ethics" - is
the local morality of that level.
> I don't remember using the word "objective"... rather, the quote was a
> rhetorical flourish to remind you that SELF-EVIDENCE isn't really
> evidence at all. By your logic (as presented here) it is nothing more
> than the agreement of a majority which creates a truth.... I find it
> bizarre that to support the MoQ you access many of the same arguments
> used by theologists to support the existence of God, often claimed to
> be supported by such "self-evidence". Don't you have anything more
> persuasive???? And no, I have not been sleeping in class. This is not
> how intellect out of socitey works, you're trying to slip one past me.
> Rather, Intellect out of society comes (as you have so eloquently
> said on past occasions) as result of those things that are INDEPENDENT
> of what any one (or any society) thinks of them. Not merely things
> that massive groups agree to be self-evident.
All Q-levels are out of the former, seemingly in stark contrast -
independent even - seen from within the upper one, but bound to its
parent seen from the overall Quality p.o.v. The most telling example
is the inorganic-organic struggle, but exactly the same
"mechanism" is at work regarding Society and Intellect.
SOM (in which there are no levels) is unable to cope with the
enigma how life came out of matter, something that has resulted in
two mutually exclusive stances: Divine creation and evolution
(Darwin). The way the QMetaphysics unites the two have
implications for the Intellect-out-of-Society enigma. You seem to
harbour a similar view of Society (..nothing more than agreement
...merely things that massive groups agree ..etc) as the somists
(be they darwinists or creationists) regard nature - entirely
incompatible with and hostile to life.
At page 144 in LILA Pirsig says: ..."Either life is with physical
nature or it's against it. If it's with nature there's nothing to survive. If
it's against physical nature then there must be something apart
from the physical and chemical forces of nature that is motivating it
to be against physical nature". This very quandary is what the
MOQ resolves and is most relevant for the rest of the Q sequence.
Just replace the respective terms in the quotation.
You correctly say that (I say that) intellectual value is something
independent of Society, and independent Intellect is - seen from
Intellect (SOM in my book) - just as Biology is independent of
Inorganity - seen from Biology. Each level must maintain this
illusion to fulfil its purpose, but in the Quality overview (beyond
Intellect) things look different.
As you know unto vomiting I don't consider the social/intellectual
conflict to be much of an issue any longer. Intellectual value has
long since established its superiority vs Society and refuses to see
anything but self. The dynamic/static struggle is now up against
the rigours of intellect, but all lower levels are part of the structure
and the social element is applied by Intellect to suppress anything
that threatens its sovereignty. Yet, the dynamics goes on ....!
Thanks for reading. Hope my droning on isn't too infuriating:-)
Bo
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:29 BST