Hi Mati, I think you maybe discount those who "get" Bo's SOL but actually don't entirely agree ? But anyway - you pose straightforward questions to answer .... mine inserted below [IG] ...
On 7/15/08, Mati Palm-Leis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MD Group, > > I find it interesting that we continue to go round and round (I think it is > now over 7 + years) on this issue of what is the intellectual level and > what does it mean and how do we discern what an intellectual value is. > This is a really good question with a variety of possible solutions and > understandings, some possibilities good, some lacking. I thought I would > provide some humble thoughts on the matter with the disclaimer that overall > I personally think Bodvar's approach with S/O divide being the basis for the > intellectual level (in the static form) being the best one going. [IG] I've agreed with Bo before that the emergence of the S/O divide is OK as the historical point at which the intellectual level emerged. If that is all we want from MoQ - history - then I'd have no argument. I just think it is plainly evident that the content of the intellectual level is not "defined" by SOMism now and for all time ... MoQ is an evolutionary model, with a future. Either the intellectual includes that future or we predict further levels above the SoMist level. There is more than SoMism, no ?. > amazed that he is able to endless explain and re-explain his point of view > with only recently in the past year with some people "Getting it" to some > degree. That being said here is a series of questions that might provide a > litmus test to anybody who thinks they (including Bodvar) are able to better > define or understand what the Intellectual level and intellectual values > are. > > 1. How does your definition or understanding of intellectual > level/value differentiate the social level from the intellectual level as > well as social values from intellectual values? [IG] I think the main "axes" that define the difference are social (constraint) vs intellectual (freedom), and social (collective) vs intellectual (individual). I've said this a million times. But exactly how ? Apart from the directions / dimensions of these axes, I've never yet come to any firm demarcation lines, so I simply treat these as many possible patterns within one "cultural (socio-intellectual) level" (for now). > > 2. Given there is a evolutionary process to each of the levels, what > is a possible historical point in which represents the likelihood for the > birth of the Intellectual level, and what is the basis for this > period/event(s) chosen? [IG] Yes. No problem with the birth of SOMism as the first incarnation of the intellectual level. I'm just not satisfied that history is the whole story. > > 3. I think (an assumption of mine) that both social and intellectual > levels use language, but in different ways. Please describe how each level > utilizes language to sustain its level? [IG] Precisely. This symbolic manipulation / semantic-lingustic communication is shared by both levels (another reason I resist using this as the definitive demarcation too). I think you identify a good angle - the way language is used, rather than language per-se. (Clearly SoMist language - invented at the emergence of the intellectual - infected and spread to social level patterns too.) I think the real difference is what the levels "seek to do" with language - about intent, purpose, telos. Social tends to control / conserve, Intellectual tends to freedom / creation. I've often formed the interim conclusion that this is the best distinction we have. > > 4. Given that intellectual values dominate it's parent level, the > social level, yet must sustain and maintain a relative harmony with the > social level. Given your definition or understanding of intellectual levels > how do intellectual values do that? [IG] That is the $64,000 question. How do social constraints (best) live in balanced harmony with intellectual freedoms ? My answer has been evolving for 7 years so far. My latest thinking involves a telos - a traditonal mythology - that sets future "direction" for "our culture's" evolution. Scary thought. Whatever, I'm convinced there is (by definition) no entirely intellectual (SOMist, trad-rationalist or otherwise) answer to that question. Think about it. (clue - Nietzsche / Godel / Wittgenstein / Hofstader and more.) > > I have read Lila and much of Pirsig's work and am very familiar with what > Lila has to say about some of these questions in a general context. Yet in > Pirsig's letter to Paul Turner he seems to have made his final contribution > to this question. In a private final correspondence with him long ago, > about a research question related to this very question of intellectual > values, he more or less has hung his hat his letter to Paul Turner in his > addressing the intellectual level. That being said, and with the deepest > sense of respect and gratitude for Mr. Pirsig, I feel that we have failed to > really move forward on this question. [IG] I agree. Perhaps in the context of this Q&A, you should re-state (simply in summary) Pirsig's position from that letter ? > Again I think Bodvar's approach, > begins to provide the capacity to approach these, I believe, essential > questions. Thus providing us with the capacity to move MOQ forward. [IG] Paradoxically - this is precisely my objection to Bo's approach - great historically, not much use for moving forward ;-) (Great to have your contribution Mati - pursue this thread to some "conclusion" for all our sakes.) > > Sincerely, > > Mati 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/
