Ron,
Ron:I agree that Bodvar's approach points to the distinction but I have to disagree with his notion that the s/o divide is a universal human condition. He does point to Western cultures specific distinction of it's own intellectual level with out a doubt. Mati: Well I am glad we are in half agreement, but I am unaware in the Eastern Culture in the Historical period of 500 B.C. (give or take a hundred years) that provide a different form of intellect that broke away from the social level as decisive as the SOM. As I noted in my post to Ian, if you observe modern day research methologies in the eastern cultures they likely teather themselves to the S/O split (SOM) because, I believe, because it was the most effective means to define reality in a research environment. If the Eastern philosophical tradition was able to define reality in a more effective means I would suggest that would be a) incorporated already or b) displaced SOM or c) we would be studying them in the western world. As a side note Zen Buddhism as a whole rejects intellect as a means for greater understanding yet there is a common notion that perhaps Buddhism is a different form of intellect. It is what it is. Ron: I think the best way of defining an intellectual level is by how a culture describes it. Clearly this is representational of the levels, with intellect being emergent from the society. There is no universal society therefore no universal definition of the intellectual level. Mati: I think this approach has its limitations because, as illustrated in both ZAMM and LILA, culture has been so entrenched in the SOM it is difficult to see it in any other way. However I will eat my cake and have it too, by saying that is SOM is so entrench in our culture that might suggest this might support defining Intellect as SOM. Ron: This then falls rightly with your line of questioning above and agrees with the MoQ description as a whole. The s/o divide is the intellectual level for western culture. Intellect in western culture is defined by analytical thinking. analytical thinking predicates itself on the s/o distinction as layed out by Aristotles axioms of analytical logic. To make the distinction between that which is measurable is measurable and that which is not, is not. Mati: BINGO!!! All the best, 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/
