Hi Ian, thanks for the clarification.
I was out shopping with my 82 yr old mum the other day and was struck by how she was at the mercy of her train of associations - she seemed to be losing her volition and unable to deliberate, my dad even more so since he fell and banged his head recently and now rambles and seems to be in a waking dream a lot of the time. It was very sobering to see them - some people die while they are in mid gesture, without warning or pain but most of us face the slow decline. So it goes. I thought I agreed with Bo, that SOM distinguishes the intellectual level, but as you have pointed out, subjects and objects are necessary at the social level too. Certainly, a characteristic of the most impressive people that I have met is an apparent ability not to be taken by the stimulus, not to react immediately, but, instead, to be able to momentarily say 'no' to the stimulus, pause, and then respond appropriately after a kind of reflection. This 'ability' has been referred to as 'inhibition and direction' (in the Alexander world) and 'apperception' by others. If intelligence is anything to do with the advantageous navigation through life of the individual then this ability to pause is one of the key attributes of that intelligence. Conversely, the absence of this ability to pause and reflect, is a characteristic of the herd, the tribe, the social mind. This is a semantic mine field but I'd agree and say that self-consciousness (not the embarrassed kind) could be understood in a similar way to this apperception. The self-consciousness I'm talking about should tend to be inclusive of the whole self, the corporeal self and it can be learned and practiced. Regards -Peter On 12/11/2007, ian glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Peter, (and Ron & Gav et al) > > You are agreeing we can attribute ants (and bees and meerkat's, and > many things) with "intelligence" (ie you agree they DO manipulate > semantically significant symbols.) > > The question is whether that intelligence is the same as "intellect" - > the intellect that gives name to the 4th level. > > For example - Do they in any sense rationalize this manipulation, the > meanings, the symbology - or still, are they capable of questioning it > ? > > I believe, like you it seems, that "self-consciousness" is an > important attribute of intellect .... the ability to question the > consequences of "what if" in the world beyond your immediate > experience, yet still from the individual perspective. > > So back to the MoQ > > (We have to be careful not to re-introduce the individual vs > collective confusion into theis social / intellectual question.) > > ... For me ... to summarise ... I'm suggesting the "self-conscious > questioning" is what distinguishes intellectual from social level > behaviour. (Clearly intelligence per se is NOT the distinguishing > feature.) > > Ian > > On 11/12/07, Peter Corteen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Ian and all, > > > > I'm confused by this distinction between intellect and intelligence - > and I > > can't go back and read all of this thread in the hope of finding a clue. > > > > In man, I regard the self-consciousness as a projection of the brain and > not > > a thing or spirit, in itself; Putting the word 'I' to it is where the > symbol > > comes in but the thought, the sensation of self comes before the word. > > > > If we agree that the individual ant can do intelligent things > independently > > of the colony then why can't be attribute them with intelligence? Who is > to > > say that they don't have some rudimentary ability to manipulate symbols? > As > > far as I know, we can't even pinpoint where symbols exist in our own > brains, > > even though we obviously use them. > > > > Sorry if this is too simplistic at this stage of this thread. > > > > -Peter > > > > On 12/11/2007, ian glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Ron, Krim, Gav ... > > > > > > Two threads here ... the excellent epiricism / radical / pure / SOMist > > > / pragmatist debate ... making great strides DMB, Matt, DM .... keep > > > it up. > > > > > > But another voice lost ... Gav pointed out again the distinction > > > between intelligence and intellect. For me, to resolve this, is a big > > > part of the social / intellectual confusion. > > > > > > The Meerkats (and Bees and Ant-colonies) are great examples. We see > > > them do intelligent things individually and socially, but does anyone > > > of us believe they use any kind of intellectual reasoning to do them ? > > > As Ron says, they do communicate, they do manipulate symbols > > > semantically, but yet they still do not use "intellect". Are we any > > > closer to the social / intellectual distinction ? > > > > > > Personally, I believe intellect is simply (at any point in time) the > > > highest level of reasoning so far evolved, by which other forms of > > > reasoning can be questioned (and judged inferior). For a long time > > > SOMism (rightly or wrongly) held that role, even though other more > > > enligtened forms of reasoning existed. The judgement of which form of > > > intellect holds sway is essentially .. well ... social. Hence the > > > problem. > > > > > > Acceptance ... of "imposition" of habit, by convention > > > vs > > > Questioning of ... anything and everything ... inlcuding habits of > mind. > > > = A sliding grey-scale from social to intellectual > > > > > > Ian > > > > > > On 11/10/07, Krimel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > [Ron then] > > > > Dogs, Primates, the meercats in "meercat manor" all exhibit > > > communication > > > > And reasonably complex social structure. Which implies a certain > degree > > > > Of symbol manipulation and subjective agreement. We humans exhibit > the > > > > Most complex forms but I'd hesitate to say we are the only species > > > > That displays intellect. However crude. > > > > > > > > [Krimel now] > > > > Ants "communicate" with chemical signals. Bees do the "waggle dance" > and > > > > putty nose monkeys have different alarm cries for leopards than > eagles. > > > They > > > > even combine the two cries syntactically to signal time to move to a > new > > > > territory to forage. I would be as reluctant to call this > "intellect" as > > > I > > > > would be to say that the Greeks invented "intellect" > > > > > > > > [ron then] > > > > When intellect has yet to be defined sufficiently yes, it does > create a > > > > Lot Of confusion about what is meant by pre-intellect. The important > > > part I > > > > Feel Needs clarification is which way are we focusing to achieve a > > > quality > > > > awareness? Some impressions imply that it is to be found in > > > > pre-intellect And replacing SOM with MOQ. We have demonstrated that > SOM > > > is > > > > cultural As well as intellectual and is a huge contributing factor > in > > > how we > > > > Perceive reality. > > > > > > > > [Krimel now] > > > > I don't think we need to focus on intellect to find Quality > awareness. > > > This > > > > Quality awareness is rooted in biology and modified through > experience > > > but > > > > it does not require intellect to be expressed or for that matter to > be > > > > suppressed. In other words Quality awareness is not something that > needs > > > to > > > > be achieved. It just is. > > > > > > > > > > > > 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/ > > > > > > > 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/ > > > > > 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/ > > > 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/ > 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/
