Re: MF Discussion Topic for December 2003

Date: Fri Dec 12 2003 - 20:36:17 GMT

  • Next message: Paul Turner: "RE: MF Discussion Topic for December 2003"

    I recognizing Paul's MOQ expertise, and admire his rhetoric skills,
    but it's pretty clear that P. doesn't consider his own thoughts
    regarding intellect as more valid than anyone's else (no Papal Bull
    ..etc.). This is really admirable and doesn't detract from his great
    achievement in creating the MOQ (something I have said unto
    exhaustion) but the orthodox definition of intellect remains dubious.

    Mark 11-12-03: A definition is an Intellectual aesthetic. It is misleading to
    describe definition as dubious, because dubiety implies doubt, and doubt
    implies openness to truth claims. In the MoQ, truth is a species of the good,
    therefore, the good is more determinant and important: a definition is beautiful
    or ugly.
    The MoQ description of intellect places coherence and beauty central to it's
    nature - therefore, inventing truth definitions of the intellect is less than
    the totality of the intellect.

    We seem unable to snap out of this mind/matterish frame of mind
    reflected by these analogies, that Q-intellect's problemes are to be
    likened with "thinking unable to define thinking" and/or "the eye
    unable to see itself" ...etc. We are "...still somists after all these
    years." to say it with Paul (Simon).

    Mark 11-12-03: The term, 'Q-intellect' has been repeatedly verified as an
    invention of Bodvar Skutvik. The term, 'Q-intellect' is therefore a term used in
    a different metaphysics to that of the Metaphysics of Quality. Here, Bodvar
    Skutvik is describing the MoQ in terms of a different metaphysics - that of his
    The static levels and DQ relationship of the MoQ may be considered to be an
    improvement on the Dhuka of Buddhist description and not Western Mind/Matter

    The root of the problem lies in the fact that few people recognize
    the fact that intellect is supposed to be a static level, but rather
    regard it as in the fashion shown above: Abstraction per se. Some
    (Scott Roberts mostly) has shown that this leads to everything
    being intellect (a definition wielded by Jonathan and many more,
    but not from Scott's premises) who I most intensely would have
    liked to join in a thrust for a more "quality-like" intellect, but he has
    left the MOQ ....for this very reason!!!!'s frustrating.

    Mark 11-12-03: A static repertoire is by definition static. The Intellect has
    both a static repertoire and a Dynamic tension between static patterns. The
    evolving coherence of the patterns is towards DQ.

    Paul is of course right in saying that Pirsig isn't saying that
    intellect is mystical and that the term "preintellectual awareness"
    says it all. What we mean by all these SOM's S-derivative: mind,
    consciousness, awareness, thinking ...etc. are of course the
    VALUE-PERCEPTION connected with intellect. But there are
    similar pre-static perceptions at all other levels. At intellect it leads
    to the subject/object value, but there is the ineradicable notion that
    this part of the ZMM describes another intellectual pattern being
    born, while it is MOQ taking leave of intellect.

    Mark 11-12-03: This is wandering away from the central point raised by Sam.
    Sam is concerned to discover if a description of the Intellect is incoherent.
    But if a description of the intellect is aesthetic rather than truthful, the
    problem dissolves: The pre-intellectual response to Quality is found in SQ-SQ
    tension between components of the static repertoire; this tension is the point
    at which DQ evolves greater coherence, or destroys coherence altogether in the
    A process of SQ-SQ tension and SQ-DQ evolution indicates the source of our
    experience of beauty, and this description is explicitly made in Lila.

    > Either we can talk about the intellectual level in comparison with the
    > other levels or we can't. Either we can develop some systematic analysis
    > and description of how the intellectual level functions and about the
    > static patterns that we can discern emerging, or else the level
    > collapses into DQ, whereof one must remain silent.

    Spot on!!!!

    Mark 11-12-03: The essay, 'The edge of Chaos' indicates how a static
    repertoire of patterns (The intellectual level) evolves towards increasingly coherent
    states of beauty in response to DQ. Aesthetic appreciation provides a
    vocabulary with which to describe, and influence our experiences in a progression
    towards greater coherence and beauty.
    One may reflect upon the use of poetry and music, mathematics and geometry to
    transcend the static repertoire of our Intellectual experience? In these
    endeavours, artists discover exceptional coherence between static patterns in a
    pre-Intellectual response to harmony.

    > Either RMP is right
    > to say that "Grammar, logic and mathematics can be described as the
    > rules of this sign manipulation" - and we can therefore describe some
    > elements of the fourth level with confidence - or else RMP is right to
    > say that "the intellectual level cannot describe itself any better than
    > an eye can directly see itself."

    Right, Pirsig's initial intention when writing his MOQ was obviously
    that intellect is no mystical realm, but very much another static
    development, but then ...he somehow lost momentum and lapsed
    back into this somish mindish mire.

    Mark 11-12-03: The intellectual level may be fruitfully described as a static
    repertoire of value patterns. That repertoire, is a potential of
    relationships which open up to Dynamic intervention when aligned in an exceptionally
    coherent state. One must note that mind is an inappropriate term to apply to these
    relationships - it may be more appropriate to think in terms of Dhuka of


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archive -
    MF Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Dec 13 2003 - 01:23:36 GMT