Hettinger (hettingr@iglou.com)
Tue, 1 Sep 1998 18:31:36 +0100
Ken and all,
> I regard the four SPoV levels as an artifact to aid discussion and
> explanation. I think Maggie does also even if she has not come to the point
> of realization yet.
In the sense that they are worth understanding, I agree. But they are good for
a lot more than just talking about. There is a definite "shift" that occurrs
when an entity's dominant mode of perception changes from one level to
another. That shift, whether conscious or unconscious, is concurrent with the
entity shifting its direction. A group that functions in the
intellectual-social realm moves toward many kinds of diversity and might be
able to function just fine. This group, if it's reasonably stable but still
balanced enought to perceive Dynamic Quality, will be able to go on its merry
way, discovering new intellectual possibilities that help it re-order its
social, biological and inorganic members in such a way that it keeps traveling
on that "higher plane".
If, however, the group overreaches itself, and somehow, perhaps due to a lack
of awareness of biological needs, or because of a limitation of its driving
intellectual theories, or (as I see a lot) isn't aware of its supporting social
patterns, changes itself in such a way that there are problems, intellect MAY
be able to supply a bridge and pull it through, but maybe not. Suddenly, the
situation changes. The group no longer functions in the social-intellectual
realm, but in social-biological. This is not gradual.
The group now finds itself in a position in which, in order to function at all,
it has to resort to more-social functions, such as leadership, loyalty, a more
military-type of operation, in which people DON'T all participate in
decision-making, but just get humping and get the work done. There will
probably be some biological latching, too, as turf gets defended. Notice
that this is a kind of lower-level re-evaluation. After it is done, if the
entity is still in existence, a new balance may be built, which allows the
group and all its members to move back up toward that higher plane. Within
social balance points, intellectual kinds of behavior can again come into play.
What MoQ has that no other theory has is an explanation of the internal
opposites that affect everything in our world. It also explains why people
don't see this, because when the level shift occurs, an entirely different
sensing organization comes into play. The social patterns (that kept the
group from falling all the way to the bottom) will never be able to understand
what the intellectual patterns are about. To social, intellect is pretty
incomprehensible. The reverse can be true as well. The
intellectually-oriented group that doesn't get much feedback from social is way
out in left field when a degenerative shift occurs. It may not even realize
that the shift has happened, because the "nerve centers" of the original
guiding source aren't always connected to the social. It just knows that its
members aren't behaving as they should.
This directional understanding could be important to a lot of people, who don't
have good tools to navigate through all this. MoQ sets a pattern for better
intellectual tools.
Discreteness is important in this model. The opposites are important. OK,
well a lot of people have seen the opposites and the tensions. But, as far as
I have been able to find out, ONLY Pirsig has seen that there are four layers,
four distinct groups of opposition. And ONLY MoQ shows that this is more than
"just" yin becoming yang, back and forth.
I have a drawing of this that you might not have seen, maybe it will help my
case.
http://members.iglou.com/hettingr/pirsig/SystemsFour.gif
Remember in ZMM where Pirsig talks about intellectuals opposing society, and
somehow getting off the track, and getting sucked in by the biological
direction instead?
If you look at this diagram, you see how the directions match up, and how the
two can be confused.
Intellectual---->
<----Social
Biological----->
<-----inorganic
To many of the individual members of a group, who may not themselves,
individually, be functioning on the intellectual level, any direction the group
takes in the intellectual direction looks like biology (with some luck or
wierdness thrown in.) If an entity takes off on an intellectual tack and
somehow loses whatever balance was buoying it up, inertia takes it not back to
social, but toward biological.
Now, here's the other insight that MoQ has that NOBODY else does. We've
talked about another higher layer, and I think there's a good case for it, just
within the last half-century. If it's not there, then there's a DQ balance
point that has been reached. I'm pretty sure it's one or the other, and I'm
not sure there's a difference.
<----new direction
Intellectual---->
<----Social
Biological----->
<-----inorganic
There's a new direction happening, and it's being formalized. There are formal
ways that groups, corporations and such "escape" intellectual pattens and move
to some transcendent different drummer. The leadership and business
literature is full of this.
And the literature is also full of a lot of schlock. Organizations are trying
this new stuff with enthusiasm, but many don't make it. They don't get better,
they get worse. Many of the people who have experienced the new direction are
attempting to pass on the experience, but when the transcendent part of the
message (or action) gets lost somewhere, do you know what's left? Social
stuff. Anti-intellectual social stuff. Social patterns that were
re-emphasized to bring about the transcendent balance BECOME the new direction
and a dangerous degeneration occurs. It's happening a lot. And nobody has a
worldview that can give them a clue to what's going on.
Except us.
Of course, there are a few details to work out. <grin>
Cheers,
Maggie
>
-- homepage - http://www.moq.org/lilasquad unsubscribe/queries - mailto:lilasquad@moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:45 CEST
