Hello Bo, I think this is where we come to an agreement of sorts and hopefully and understanding.
> It is of interest to note that while some dolphins are reported to have > learned English (up to fifty words used in correct context) no human > being has been reported to have learned Dolphinese. - Carl Sagan Bo: Now, THIS is INTELLIGENCE and for years I have tried to convey the importance of the difference between this and INTELLECT particularly important for the MOQ where the 4th level is so grossly misinterpreted. Ron: As I have noted before you have brought up a very important distinction and I am always forthcoming with kudos to you for it. The only distinction I believe there is a culturally derived one since intellect emerges from the highest social value patterns. Different societies yield differing forms of intelligence. There could well be dolphins out there that are far more intellectual than you or I. What I have difficulty with is that you use our western definition of intellect as a universal blanket definition of intelligence across the board. What this does is place our definition of intellect as THE definition of intellect and it places SOLAQI as evolutionarily superior with you being the pinnacle by virtue of the fact that you are the only one who subscribes. Given your comments of self proclaimed conceit, I take this to be your motive for clinging to this concept. Honestly, I do not see how interpreting all static patterns as objectively verifiable changes much when we are still blind to dynamic quality. Is'nt that what started the whole thing? blindness to dynamic quality? This is the crisis we face, a crisis I don't see SOLAQI solving. Thanks Bo 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/
