SA,

Matt said:
That's why I don't go for the distinction between intelligence and intellect as 
what divides Pirsig's levels.  Intelligence is obviously the biologically 
linked thing that we share with the animals, but I think that's all there is.  
"Intellect" is a reification of a set of cultural innovations that humans were 
able to create in part through their creation of language.  Language was just a 
tool we created to help us survive.  So were all the other innovations that 
language made possible.  Some of these innovations took on a life of their own, 
but how do we tell an evolutionary story about the creation of "intellect" if 
it isn't a set of cultural innovations?  We haven't been able to do it for 
"mind" or "representations" yet, and that's partly why philosophers of a 
pragmatist stripe have been working so hard to retire them.

SA said: 
My point exactly.  This is why I keep saying we could try to define intellect 
and any other level all day and night and we wouldn't be able to.  If we 
completely thought we did, then we would be stuck.  These levels are defining 
something more dynamic, creative, free, and open than we may think at this 
moment.  This is how improvising works so well on the day to day events.  We 
may try to organize and structure our lives into Confucian habits, but nature's 
wind will blow and the inspiration will flow.

Matt:
Your point, however, is not my point.  We _can_ define intellect, and all the 
other levels, and we _should_ define intellect, and all the other levels.  
You've made the exact mistake I think we should avoid: you've conflated 
thinking with SOM.  The idea of defining something "completely" is the SOMic 
mistake, the possibility that is an impossibility.  Plato's Forms are this 
idea, where the concept hooked directly onto its essence in a perfect, 
immutable relationship.  But thinking that we are ineluctably drawn to SOM 
simply by virtue of thinking, or using words, is the perfect inverse of SOM: 
monistic quietism--and an inverse is no better than the original.

When we define concepts and terms, we aren't defining _completely_, we're 
trying to fashion an ad hoc tool for the moment.  The zephyr wind will always 
blow, but Pirsig's point is that organizing and structuring is one of the 
things that we do to weather hurricanes.  All we need to do is to stop writing 
our earthly messages into the stars above.


Matt
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Café. Stop by 
today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
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/

Reply via email to