DMB, confused by the confusion about intellectual and social ? (before we get to the "pre-intellectual" distincton, etc.).
Yes, reading ZMM or a DMB e-mail is (may be) an intellectual activity, but it's hardy a definition of intellectual. Is reading say, the bible or a safety-manual (necessarily) an intellectual activity ? Let me start with this one line of yours ... "Social level communication is more like the use of symbols in conventional and habitual ways." So both social and intellectual levels involve communication and some form of language / manipulation of symbols ... symbols that represent ... something. Let me suggest, that at the social level the symbolic representations are as you say, by habit and convention, and perhaps by convention managed / encouraged / established by authority ? So at the intellectual level therefore, they are not. The symbolic representations, of meaning etc, use some other (freer, more creative) form of "thinking" than habit, convention, authority - using basic building blocks like logic, and experience, and introspection, and what else ? The confusion arises when someone (like me) suggests that logical-positive, objectivist, SOMist thinking and argumentation (even logic itself) are in fact matters of convention and habit, handed down through our experience of our "culture". I see the social and intellectual distinction as a wide grey scale, with varying levels of authority, convention and policy used to support the meaning behind symbolic manipulation and communication. But almost no clear distinction ... very little communication that doesn't have at least some reliance on authority and convention at some level. One "mental" level with varying degrees of reliance on socially conditioned convention. Sorry, Ian 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/
