[Arlo had said] Of course it is. At best, "collective" points to the concentric spheres of activity, beginning with the smallest microgenetic activity on up to large socio-cultural activity. It points to both symbolic and psychomotor activity.
[Platt] Would you mind translating that in plain English? [Arlo] I was just agreeing with both "individual" and "collective" are useful conventions. Above, all I am saying is that there is no monolithic "collective", that "collectives" exist from the smallest activity to the largest cultural pattern, that they are incorporated into both matter (inorganic and biological) and mind (social and intellectual) - I know this distinction is a point of contention, I simply use it here for brevity. Namely that both "individual" and "collective" are chameleons that must be defined contextually and pragmatically for them to have any meaning. [Platt] I found the article an indigestible piece of postmodern relativistic nonsense. [Arlo] Since the MOQ aligns with "postmodern relativistic nonsense", I take that as confirmation that the MOQ's notion of "self" is expanded upon by this path. [Platt] Anyway, since the basic concept of self is "universally found in all languages and cultures" I would say that's pretty good evidence that it's not something in fairy land we're talking about. [Arlo] It does appear to be a pattern mandated by participation in collective social activity, yes. But, just like other constructs like "love", "joy", "anger" as well as the social-mediation of intellectual patterns in general, all lead different cultures into very different understandings of, and interactions with and in, the world, I'd say the Zen Buddhist view recently detailed by Ant is the way to go... and that these "postmodern" treatises on the "self" are simply attempts (good or bad) to codify that into Western, scientific language. [Platt] Finally, some people are impressed by big words in complex sentences favored by academics. I'm not. I much prefer Pirsig's down-to-earth plain English style that says in 10 words what academics say in ten paragraphs. [Arlo] I think we all admire Pirsig's rhetorical style and appeal. Academic language (in not just philosophy, but everything to mathematics) can be a incomprehesible language to those outside those communities, but this is hardly reason to dismiss anything you don't understand. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
