Ian, Platt, Moqtalk
14 Feb. Ian wrote:
> Interesting Bo and Platt, (and Arlo & Ron et al) That you both pick up
> on this "individuality" aspect of the intellect distinction from the
> social .... attractive I'll agree,
The finer points tend to be overlooked, and my "in a sense"
obviously suffered that fate. What I meant was that from within
the intellectual level (SOM) the individual, its rights, freedom,
worth is adamant, and saving this requires OBJECTIVITY. What
threatens this is society's bigotry, conformity, prejudice i.e:
SUBJECTIVITY.
But intellect is a MOQ level, not a static intellectual pattern, and
from the MOQ seen a different picture is revealed. The dreaded
"society" is a value level - intellect's necessary base - but as the
upper level regards the lower as its natural born enemy this
strained relationship occurs.
Again, it was not the individual that rose above the social level
(it's a fallout) but OBJECTIVITY in the form of truth versus
opinion. This dichotomy developed as described in ZAMM into
the full-fledged SOM that dominated the Western culture until the
MOQ arrived, but SOM's tentacles are tough and all resistance to
the SOL are efforts to keep the MOQ a SOM sub-set.
Ian concluded:
> but as I've mentioned as an aside in dozens of these intellectual level
> debates recently .... haven't we concluded previously that this is a
> wrong or misleading direction ?
Intellect as "individual vs society" is misleading from MOQ's
point of view and that is what we are here to promote. I agree
dear Ian ... if I have got your finer points ;-)
Bo
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/
