[Chris] Because if you think about it, the logic that we have built and that is based on this idea of subjects and objects grows naturally from this point - when people starts to make this distinction.
[Arlo] I think there are undeniable global similarities from the moment where symbols became contemplatable "things-in-themselves". Written language is one, the codification of symbols into an abstract, but logical, system. The "self" is another, as I don't think you can point to any post-intellectual culture and see an absense of "what am I?, why am I here?", fundamental philosophical questions. Following this is a codification of laws, and the desire to "record history". All these things owe their origins to the moment when symbols became objects to be analyzed themselves. [Chris] Now, I also think that the variations in how this rationality is constructed has to do with the development of the social level, and how strong it is. [Arlo] Again, absolutely. The "I" varies from culture to culture. Pirsig describes this in ZMM. "Thus, in cultures whose ancestry includes ancient Greece, one invariably finds a strong subject-object differentiation because the grammar of the old Greek mythos presumed a sharp natural division of subjects and predicates. In cultures such as the Chinese, where subject-predicate relationships are not rigidly defined by grammar, one finds a corresponding absence of rigid subject-object philosophy." (ZMM) Pirsig has also talked about how ZMM was not seen as such a monumentous book in Japan because their culture did not have the sharp S/O dualism, and so "they got it" and saw the book as pretty much common sense. (This was on Ant's website at one point, I can find the link if you want). This is why Einstein considered the "I" an "optical delusion of consciousness". With the advent of intellectuality, we have the advent of the "I", but we also have different metaphysical responses to that "I", and one is the S/O dualism that underscored western intellectual development. This is why I disagree with Bo, I don't think the intellectual level is inherently SOL, I think it can be but that depends on the social-cultural foundations upon which it is built (this underscores the totality of intellectual patterns, not just the "self" pattern). 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/
