Hi Platt. 17 Feb. you wrote:
Bo had said: > > As said to Ron the > > individual has existed from times immemorial without transcending > > the social reality. Some leverage outside it was needed and in my > > opinion the emergence of the SOM fits. Platt: > Agree, but the "leverage" you speak of was the mind of an individual > who first split his experience and attached symbols to subjects and > objects. It took eons before his newly invented symbols where adopted > by others until finally they reached a tipping point to become the > intellectual level at a time and place I believe you've identified as > ancient Greece. SOM didn't magically emerge by itself. The MOQ rejects S/O as existence's deepest split and installs the Dynamic/Static one. And because mind/matter is a variety of the S/O there is no "mind" as a separate entity - as little as there are "matter". What you call "mind" is what I call "intelligence" and that has been around since biological brain. Its capability to "store experience [memory] and manipulate it" became social with the 3rd. level and with language it grew to a power-tool, and when it began to probe beyond the social mythological realm the 4th. level was born. As usual the upper level made everything into own value and the 4th. adopted the said "intelligence", but now it became MIND, a subjective realm different from the objective world, hence SOM. Then finally the MOQ from where the level context is seen and in whose view the 4th. level is the S/O distinction (in the SOL interpretation at least). I don't think we really disagree. Commenting some point of yours above. > "...an individual who first split his experience and attached symbols > to subjects and objects. You mean language (which is experience symbolized, and intellect regards as subject/object-divided) > It took eons before his newly invented symbols where adopted by others > until finally they reached a tipping point to become the intellectual > level at a time and place Yes, language emerged deep inside the social level and it took tens of thousands of years before to reach the intellectual level. But I don't think ancient people knew any S/O divide - in the symbol/what's symbolized form or any other. > I believe you've identified as ancient Greece. I do, but why not accept ZAMM as the authority of what happened in Greece? It describes it as the emergence of Truth that along a long and twisted route resulted in "our" SOM whereof the individual possessing a free mind is a variety. Platt: > Since the brujo was tortured for his ideas and behavior by the social > priests I see his example as an individual vs. society struggle. It > was the brujo's intellect after all that caused the societal shift and > his elevation from an outcast to leader. Societies necessarily consists of individuals and there are those who are more strong-willed than others and if ruthless enough they may become leaders. In the old social level days kings and such, in our intellect-dominated societies only presidents and prime ministers ;-) No, the individual vs. society isn't always intellect vs. society, but - again - because "homo sapens" is the biological carrier of social vlue and society is the base of intellect there's always an individual involved. Platt: > OK. I got lost about half way through the answer to a question I'm > equally unsure of. ;-) No wonder, I wandered over to Ron's "cultural" idea. Important enough but irrelevant here. Yours sincerely 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/
