On Thursday 10 July 2008 6:19 AM Chris asks MOQers: My Fellow MOQers This thing regarding the nature of the intellectual level has proven to be, well, difficult - to say the least. I think we can all agree that the nature of the intellectual level is that of a way of responding/understanding/seeing/etc Quality in ways that are different to the ways that the other levels /responds/sees/understands Quality. Most everyone of you are fully aware of the debate concerning the "Symbol manipulation" given by Mr Pirsig and other explanations and interpretations of the nature of the intellectual level - most notably Bodvars SOL. I myself tend to discard the symbol manipulation explanation because of the - as I see it - quite obvious reason that this is not in conflict with anything. The MOQ is a moral order, as we all know, and the different levels have more or less competing "views" on Quality and how to follow it. Thus I am inclined to thing along the paths of "What is not by it's _fundamental nature_ in service of either the inorganic, the biological or the social level?" As I said - manipulation of symbols doesn't really cut it for me - where is the FUNDAMENTAL conflict? Today I thought about "human nature". Human nature and what thing it is that is usually connected to the expression that it is in "the human nature". The Quest for knowledge. Embedded in us since - well, pretty much always. This drive that seems to be something that is a fundamental part of what makes humans humans, and something that - of course - may service our biological needs and our social standards, but that in essance is separated from these things, that in essance is something that strives towards something quite aside from these Patterns of Value. Knowledge for knowledge's sake. I am not sure that it *is* the Intellectual level, but it sure seems to be a most notable manifestation of it. Knowledge for Knowledge's sake. Alone.
Hi Chris and all, Evolution as conflict resolution, I like that. The INORGANIC reproduces by collision. The individual is changed, conflict is profitable. The ORGANIC level reproduces in two ways, by cell self-division, or by cell wall penetration by a sperm cell. What conflict has been resolved by the evolution of the ORGANIC LEVEL? The integrity of the one remains intact. More than one individual arises from within rather than from chance. THE CONFLICT of reproduction by COLLISION is resolved. The SOCIAL level evolves to CONSCIOUSNESS/SELF-AWARENESS. The individual knows changes are occurring, but an undefined self is untouched and alone. CONFLICT between the ONE and the MANY. The INTELLECTUAL level evolves. A structure of Law for S/O conflict in the one or the many. Does evolution stop? Interior relationships within one demand resolution, the tyrant and the citizen. HIGHER SOCIAL level evolves to enlightenment S only. A conflict with an Internal Tyrant???????????????? HIGHER INTELLECTUAL level evolves to enlightenment S only. A conflict with One does not exist???????????????????????????? Joe On 7/10/08 6:19 AM, "Christoffer Ivarsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My Fellow MOQers > > This thing regarding the nature of the intellectual level has proven to be, > well, difficult - to say the least. I think we can all agree that the nature > of the intellectual level is that of a way of > responding/understanding/seeing/etc Quality in ways that are different to > the ways that the other levels /responds/sees/understands Quality. > > Most everyone of you are fully aware of the debate concerning the "Symbol > manipulation" given by Mr Pirsig and other explanations and interpretations > of the nature of the intellectual level - most notably Bodvars SOL. > > I myself tend to discard the symbol manipulation explanation because of > the - as I see it - quite obvious reason that this is not in conflict with > anything. The MOQ is a moral order, as we all know, and the different levels > have more or less competing "views" on Quality and how to follow it. Thus I > am inclined to thing along the paths of > > "What is not by it's _fundamental nature_ in service of either the > inorganic, the biological or the social level?" > > As I said - manipulation of symbols doesn't really cut it for me - where is > the FUNDAMENTAL conflict? > > Today I thought about "human nature". Human nature and what thing it is > that is usually connected to the expression that it is in "the human nature". > > The Quest for knowledge. Embedded in us since - well, pretty much always. > This drive that seems to be something that is a fundamental part of what > makes humans humans, and something that - of course - may service our > biological needs and our social standards, but that in essance is separated > from these things, that in essance is something that strives towards > something quite aside from these Patterns of Value. Knowledge for knowledge's > sake. > > I am not sure that it *is* the Intellectual level, but it sure seems to be a > most notable manifestation of it. > > Knowledge for Knowledge's sake. Alone. > > 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/ 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/
