Matt said:
My problem is that I don't think SOM was anything but a set of metaphors (which 
is what I think everything linguistic is), and I balk at the distinction 
between cultural and intellectual.  The notion that logic and reason suddenly 
appeared on the playing field of humanity around the time of Greece, or around 
any time for that matter, is a myth, created in the West to make the West look 
cooler.  Cultures do it all the time to make their innovations look like the 
culmination of humanity.

dmb says:
Yea, sure. The West uses reason and science and technology and wealth and very 
big guns to bolster its self-image. But cultures of all kinds use whatever they 
can to bolster their self-images too. Everybody has to be god's chosen and all 
that. I get that point and agree with it as far as it goes. But I don't think 
the social-intellectual distinction is "eviscerated" by this. 

If the historians and anthropologists can be trusted at all, I think we'd have 
to admit that the shift away from hunter-gatherer culture, which had been more 
or less the same since we were apes, is bound to create new forms of 
consciousness. Life in the city was so very different in both material 
conditions and social relations. Certain adjustments would be needed. New 
pick-up lines, for example. Things suddenly got a lot more complicated, and 
that called for a higher level of abstraction. Later, as the number and variety 
of city-states increased, some developed steady interactions with city-states 
unlike their own, with different gods, ways of life, and hotter chicks. Now the 
civilized world is getting complicated enough to do something like a 
cross-cultural analysis. This sort of thing will call for further adjustments 
in terms of the capacity for abstraction. I suppose at first this is done for 
the sake of war, trade, and nookie but a new capacity is developed thereby. 
And, as the story goes, the Greek philosophers we among the first to doubt the 
existence of their own gods, not just the other guy's. (Or so we can believe 
until older "intellectual" writings are discovered) I mean, intellect didn't 
suddenly appear so much as it rapidly developed as a response to radically new 
human conditions.

This same capacity developed around the same time in the East and I suppose 
that's simply because the same changes went in that direction too. 
Mess-o-potamia is another word for in the middle and all that. I was just 
reading Nietzsche (Beyond Good and Evil) and saw that he makes the same point 
about SOM being based Western grammer. You know, the simple way we say "I 
think" or "it rained" is workable in ordinary workaday situations. But then the 
philosophers come along and start asking metaphysical questions about the "it" 
that does the raining and the "I" that does the thinking, as if there was 
something above and beyond the thinking and the raining. Apparently, a very 
large number of silly questions can be produced by assuming that language is 
rational or "correctly" structured. But hey, I'm talking about a capacity that 
was just born yesterday. Just two hundred generations ago we were practically 
cavemen.




 
 


_________________________________________________________________
Climb to the top of the charts!  Play Star Shuffle:  the word scramble 
challenge with star power.
http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct
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