Marsha.
12 Feb. you wrote:
> I do not consider "concept" to be language only. Intellect may be
> language only, but I'm not sure. In my experience, concept may be
> bits and pieces of all sorts of mental stuff.
Look, it was the intellectual level that made language into
"concepts". People of ancient times (social level) prattled, sang
and wrote books (from Pirsig's letter to Paul Turner)
"But if one studies the early books of the Bible or if one
studies the sayings of primitive tribes today, the intellectual
level is conspicuously absent. The world is ruled by Gods
who follow social and biological patterns and nothing else."
... but had no idea of language as something only having
subjective relevance, this because they knew no subject/object
distinction Only with the 4th. level did language get the said quality
as "bits and pieces of all sorts of mental stuff". Try to climb up
from intellect's (SOM's) perch to MOQ's meta-level.
In the same letter Pirsig offered a new definition of intellect:
"Intellect" can then be defined very loosely as the level of
independently manipulable signs. Grammar, logic and
mathematics can be described as the rules of this sign
manipulation."
This should (regarding language) have been
"Intellect" can be defined as the realization that language is a
subjective representations of an objective reality."
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/
