Bo, Mati, This is why I still think we "miss a trick" in just accepting the SOL 4th layer ... since really it is a static pattern within a wider possible intellectual layer .... you yourself used the word "atrophied" - how static can you get ?
But so long as we have a future proof / evolving layer that includes MoQist intellect, I'm neutral on how we express it in a model. An extended 4th layer inlcuding both SOMism and MoQism, or a 5th MoQism layer will do (for now). Of course if we want to be less arrogant about how perfect MoQism is for all time - we should presume other better modes of thinking will evolve one day in intelligent beings - so better to have either an extensible 4th layer, or simply expect 4 & 5 to be come 4, 5, 6, 7 ... As long as we don't ignore this, I'm neutral on how we document it for now and move on to something productive. Like say, disentangling social & intellectual / individual & collective aspects of "political" freedom & responsibility - governance - debates. Ian On 7/17/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mati > > On 15 July you wrote: > > > 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. I am 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. > > I'm equally amazed, but like Paul (the apostle) on his way to > Damascus I was struck to the ground by Pirsig's ideas. I've told > about this in my "Quality Event" essay, but what made it such a > revelation was his insight that the mind/matter chasm (SOM) > wasn't indigenous to existence, but had arrived at a time in history. > and developed to a state where it looked like reality itself. > Consequently I hate to see the SOM - that Phaedrus had by its > throat - being on the loose in LILA. > > > 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? > > First of the all, the social level has nothing to do with welfare or > social security, but is all about the biological individual's > submission to something greater than itself - the COMMON > CAUSE. The most striking example these days is Islam that > transcends the individual and what they voluntarily sacrifice > themselves to. Christendom has become an "intellectual religion" > and don't demand such things. > > Against and above this looms intellect with its OBJECTIVITY that > regards social value subjective (only in people's mind) or as > RATIONALITY that renders it (social value) irrational, as > MODERNITY that looks upon it as out-dated, as KNOWLEDGE > that deems it ignorant ...etc. in so many ways as there are varieties > of the subject/objective dichotomy. > > > 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? > > Because I see intellect=the S/O distinction it follows that I regard > ZAMM's description of the emergence of SOM as intellect's birth. > The MOQ postulates that all values served its parent (before > breaking out as a separate level and if Homeric times (2000 BC) > were purely social. > > Perhaps in Homer's time, when evolution had not yet > transcended the social level into the intellectual ... (LILA) > > one may well imagine budding "intellectuals" - skeptics - who had > begun to question the god-ruled, mythological (social) reality, yet > not daring to express their doubt, Still they were clever > (extraordinary clever to have ventured out of the social realm) and > thereby served their communities in countless ways. > > > 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? > > How language is used for social purposes we see (again) in > temporary Islam cultures with mindless recitation of the Koran > verses, no one is supposed to question anything just repeat the > words. Intellect on the other hand is the absolute opposite, here > language is used for the enquiring, skeptical, questioning > purposes. > > > 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? > > The social-intellectual relationship has been equally difficult in > intellectual- and social-steeped cultures (because no level knows > the Q context) and Pirsig (correctly) believes that the MOQ will > alleviate it. However I disagree with his idea that intellect can be > enlightened to see that its "devaluation"of social patterns creates a > social nightmare. Intellect is static and must by definition pursue its > mission. It's the MOQ that gives us the grand view and it is no > intellectual sub-set. Intellect is MOQ's sub-set!!. > > This creates a level-like relationship between the intellectual level > and the meta-level of MOQ in which (relationship) intellect dislikes > a reality above itself and, but the MOQ has already begun to > exercise control of intellect (at least for those who subscribe to the > SOL) . Look at me, before the MOQ I regarded SOM a "monster" > that oppressed me greatly, now that SOM has become the fourth > Q level I'm quite happy with it - proud even. > > > 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. 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. > > Yes, and we see how the MD atrophies once left to itself, the MOQ > isn't applied to anything and no wonder, without the SOL it has > zero use. About the said P.T. letter.it hovered on the brink of > admitting the SOL, "not before the ancient Greeks" actually means > affirmation but then he added the "Oriental intellect, independent > of the Greeks" that everyone took for a rejection (but isn't, > philosophy in "the search for truth" sene is SOM) The serious blow > was the "manipulation of symbols" definition, that now renders the > MOQ paralyzed again. Look to DMB's of July 13, where he > analyzes intellect in the symbol manipulation light. Speak of "lead > balloon". Pirsig has said to me (privately) that if SOL has value it > will "percolate to the top", but as long as he speaks against it > publicly ... alas. > > > Thanks anyway > > Bodvar > > > > > > > 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/
