Hi there, Platt and Bo --
[Platt]: > I don't think SOM can be all of intellect. [Bo]: > Well if so we are back at start with a 4th. level that contains ideas, > theories, metaphysics .. etc. in a SOM-mind sense. This brief exchange captures the dilemma you folks have created for yourselves by making Intellect an extracorporeal level, pattern, or whatever. I know that Ham's two cents aren't worth a wooden nickel in this forum, but please hear me out. Intelligence is the collective knowledge of mankind that has been printed and codified for universal understanding. But since all knowledge is derived from experience, it originates with the individual intellect and is communicated to other individuals for their intellectual comprehension. While intellectual knowledge may be recorded in books or digital form, such symbolic representations ARE NOT INTELLECT. Intellect or "intellection" (the mental process of formulating experiential intelligence) is the exclusive capability of the human individual. It does not exist apart from subjective cognizance--as a "level", "realm", "pattern", or anything else. Absent human cognizance and THERE IS NO INTELLECT. Only the rational creature has the arrogance to place Intellect on a high pedestal and deify it as Cosmic Truth, if not Reality itself. By construing human reason as the ultimate measure of understanding, man worships a false god. There is no metaphysical justification for believing that Reality conforms to man's finite perspective of his experienced world. Indeed, as philosophers throughout the ages -- including Robert Pirsig -- have made abundantly clear, the reverse is true: Man creates his world to conform to his rational perspective. And the essence of experience--what starts the whole ball of wax that we call the universe rolling--is proprietary value-sensibility. I'll say it again, though it falls on deaf ears: Value is man's finite perspective of an absolute source from which he is estranged. Only a cognizant agent that is "out of the loop" has the autonomy to make Value aware as a relational system. Bo makes the point, but unfortunately has tied it up in knots with this accursed Level system: [BO]: > Can't you see the logical fault of a sub-set of a system containing the > whole system? > Pirsig pointed out the container metaphor, but then went on to violate it > by placing the MOQ as an intellectual pattern. Exactly! So why do you all insist on dehumanizing Intellect as a cosmic level? [Platt]: > Yes, I see the logical fault. I agree the MOQ is NOT an intellectual > pattern > per se but concerned primarily with non-intellectual values that precede > concepts. > Intellect has the same logical problem in attempting to explain > consciousness: it > can't get outside of it to fully observe it. An eye cannot see itself. Precisely! So why can't you see that the intellectual object of your consciousness is no more real than you are? What you observe as Reality is not you or Essence but the "pattern" that you construct from Value. Or, as Bo has astutely expressed it, "the VALUE of the S/O distinction". Still striving mightily to be essentially yours, Ham 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/
