[Marsha]
Sounds to me like science and reason (EVEN of the S/O kind) are social systems.
[Arlo]
I think what Pirsig is saying (correctly) is that the intellectual
level (ideas) is something that emerges from the social interactions
of individuals, not from "individuals alone" or "individuals
observing nature". What he is pointing out is two-fold, first that
"intellectual descriptions of nature are always culturally derived"
and second that "intellect" is not a function of the biological brain
of wo/man but of the social interactions that wo/man comes to
participate in. That is, it requires social activity for the
emergence of intellect.
In the latter case, an "idea" is never the function of "one
individual", but of that "one individual participating in a social
dialogue". In the former case, he is assailing "objectivity" that
says that the "individual" can observe nature "unbiased by cultural
associations", even to the point of suggesting that what the
individual "sees" is as much a function of cultural derivation as
whatever post-sight description s/he may apply.
You will never find, then, an intellectual pattern that is not rooted
in the social milieu from which it emerged, whether its mathematics
or philosophy. Nor will you ever find an intellectual pattern that is
not polyphonic (containing many voices).
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/
