LS Re: the four levels of MoQ

Hettinger (
Sun, 9 Aug 1998 05:46:23 +0100

glove wrote:

> schumacher gives humans an entire level to
> themselves...this is just plain old SOM at its worst.

OK. Challenge accepted.

Let me start from here
* intellectual level involves self-awareness
* pirsig says intellect is memory
* maggie says be careful because social patterns (imitated action) seem
like memory, but they are actually a different process

Let's look at different types of quality events.

* DQ interaction with social:
The capability of individual to engage in non-social activity--the
situation in which an individual belonging to a set of social patterns
is prohibited by a lower pattern (ie a physical hindrance) from
following static patterns. This is the "natural selection" of the
social level, in which DQ comes into play. If the new behavior is
imitated by others, and it is a useful adaptation, it goes into the
pattern set, and is ranked somehow.

* Intellectual interaction with social:
IF the individual who made the change has the ability of noticing it and
remembering it, the situation is the same, only it is an intellectual
interaction with social.

*Intellectual level formation:

If it becomes part of the social structure to "know" that in a given
situation, there are different ways to act (and I expect they are
personal references, ie act like Dad, or act like friends, or act like
Lincoln, or Newton, or Gandhi or any of Pirsig's ghosts, including
algebra), and the *internal* set (ranking) of social patterns applies to
make the decision, not the group's patterns, then intellect has been
socialized, and THAT would allow the formation of the intellectual

Individual "intellect" as a capability, would have been DQ to social
patterns. Socialization of intellectual behavior, and also its
replication, would be the intellectual level. And I think in this
context, there's a case for this being "human", at least if you want to
use a one-word label..

There are other species in which this has happened. Just as there have
been different sets of biological and social patterns, there have been
different sets of intellectual patterns, and the wolf pack may be part
of a non-human set.

The vast diversity of social patterns is being reformed by upper levels,
and this results, I believe, in less diversity, just as Gaea reformed
the world to its values, but diversity was lost. The same thing happens
within the intellectual level. One particular set of intellectual
patterns may war with another, as the intellectual patterns of science
have clashed with those of religion, or something higher (DQ) may give
them skyhooks so that instead of warring, they can both belong to
something higher, much as MoQ has done for science, religion, and a
number of things. This creates a new intellectual pattern set, which
may reform lower levels to its values, if they value it.

And the "intelligence" of domesticated species (whose
originally-separate-from-human intellectual sets grow within a balance
of biological safety and social situations created by human intellectual
patterns) is another thing, too, a merging of the different sets,
similar to the modern intellect being able to transcend former barriers
such as racial differences betwen people.

"Human" is not a definition of the process of the intellectual level,
but a recognition of the result of its action.

So, glove, have I managed to refine the concept of "intellectual
patterns" to include those non-human events and entities that need to
belong to it, and also show how Schumacher's one-word label "human" is
appropriate to refer to the current manefestation of intellectual

Thanks for the Quality time,


Stray thought:
It occures to me now that social patterns are the groups's memory, not

'Nother stray thought:
Is "curiosity" in animal behavior something important to this

homepage -
unsubscribe/queries -

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:37 CEST