Hi Gav, >> > i can't see it dave. i don't see how intellect can exist without >> > subjects thinking of objects.
It's better to say intellectual patterns can't exist without social patterns which can't exist without biological... >>>SOM was the evolutionary leap that >> > enabled intellect. intellect can't exist outside of this split: the >> > split is fundamental. i don't see how calling the split dynamic/static >> > changes anything. it is still a split. Remember that the M in SOM is metaphysics: "Metaphysics is what Aristotle called the First Philosophy. It's a collection of the most general statements of a hierarchical structure of thought. On one of his slips he had copied a definition of it as "that part of philosophy which deals with the nature and structure of reality." It asks such questions as, "Are the objects we perceive real or illusory? Does the external world exist apart from our consciousness of it? Is reality ultimately reducible to a single underlying substance? If so, is it essentially spiritual or material? Is the universe intelligible and orderly or incomprehensible and chaotic?"" Such analysis of thought is not fundamental. Thought must logically precede thinking about thinking. So SOM could not be the evolutionary leap you are thinking of. In other words, when you say that thinking has always been subjects thinking of objects, those are your terms from your metaphysics that you are imposing on people of the past who had no such metaphysics to speak of. Regards, Steve 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/
