----- Original Message -----
From: "Arlo Bensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Regarding The Fundamental Nature of The Intellectual Level
[Marsha]
I'm not sure if purchasing an organic apple is really deliberate.
Sophisticated? Yes. Deliberate. I don't think so. Most of what we do
on a social level is automatic.
[Arlo]
I disagree. When I form the intent to purchase an organic apple, decide
the best strategy for enacting this purchase, and then put this plan into
effect, I am acting in a very deliberate way. It is not automatic, it
requires me to think, to plan, to make decisions (which store, when, etc),
plan for contingencies (what if they are out of apples but have organic
pears?). And, this happens within a broader context of deliberations, what
am I eating and when, etc.
I'd say that both social and intellectual activity is deliberate (in terms
of human activity). The difference is in the object of activity. Don't get
me wrong, when people first started asking "what is blueness?" it set them
on a vastly more complex (higher evolved level) than "simply" the social
negotiations required to use "blue" to point to particular experiences
with certain objects.
For everyday living, your awareness level is much higher than mine. When
I'm hungry I eat, when I tired I sleep. When I paint, I paint. I try to
keep it all pretty simple.
Consider that if we think of social activity as "automatic", what does
this say about the period in human evolution pre-dating the intellectual
level?
I imagine there were intellectual patterns before there evolved an
Intellectual Level.
Were all humans automatons until intellect appears on the scene?
No. See above.
Or did social activity "automate" once we started thinking intellectually?
If so, why? Better, how?
Your questions sounds like it had to be either/or? To me social level
patterns are ritual and habit. Discovering the stone arrowhead and wheel
was more purposeful problem solving. I do not think the social level is
bad. You're acting like I have demeaned the Social Level. I haven't.
Instead I'd argue that in certain cultures, certain social and
intellectual patterns become very reified and thus appear to be
"automatic". But this appearance of automation masks the very real agency
social and intellectual levels afford, regardless of whether that agency
is non-conformative or used to reify static patterns.
From my point of view, reification of any kind is illusion. Seems to be a
worldwide convention, but it's illlusion just the same.
But we may end up agreeing to disagree on this, and that's okay.
As for your "cougar" daughter, this is another one of those strange
patriarchal areas. What would you say the male equivalent would be? We
have MILFs all over the place, but do we have any DILFs? We know that
"Stacey's Mom" has got it going on, but what about Stacey's dad? Does he?
On the other hand, I've been told by some women I know that the terms are
actually empowering because they force people to recognize that women (not
just teen girls) are sexual beings, that they validate the sexual identity
of older women. Thoughts?
I had to laugh. When my daughter was a little girl her nickname was Cougar,
or Coug. She called me the other evening in shock because she heard this
new expression and what it meant. She had grown into her nickname. "I am
Woman hear me roar..." You bet your boots the older woman are sexual.
Very! And still quite capable of multiple orgasms. But there are other
things of higher value too, like love and trust, and friendship and
playfulness.
Marsha
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/
