Hi Marsha
13 Feb. you spoke::
> I wasn't clear. I don't think, in general, static patterns of value,
> conceptual constructs, are exclusively linguistic. The spovs, not
> what they are referring to.
Well, it is the "Quality/MOQ" issue that we have been at for
months and as said to Andrê: Why this pompous "concept" term, it
is and remains language. And that of a reality that language refers
to is one of SOM's countless seedlings.
> In spovs there are other mental things available, images for example.
Sure there are, when we sleep and dream we see fantastic
scenes, but so do animals and here is the very point. At the levels
below intellect these images aren't "mental". This is too obvious to
be mentioned regarding animals, but at the social (human) level
people regarded dreams as magical experience, visitation from
gods - evil or good - nothing about this being mental or JUST
dreams.
> But I'm still uncertain about what the Intellectual Level represents.
> I'm trying to imagine if you removed all linguistic associations from
> the fourth level, would there be any patterns left.
Intellect does nor represent anything, it IS the (value of)
subject/object distinction, the one that (among a thousand things)
regards language to be subjective and what it refers to as
objective
> I'm not a mathematician, an accomplished musician or a logician to be
> able to answer that from their point-of-view. I would like to hear of
> their experience/opinion of mathematical thought and musical thought.
> My husband could read music and interpret it musically in his mind.
> That seems to be manipulating abstract symbols that does not involve
> language. I'm not sure, and I'm still not understand your
> explanation.
To read music is not different from ordinary reading and people
before the 4th. level mastered writing and reading so
"manipulating symbols" isn't intellect. Intellect - the level - is the (in
this case) "symbol/what it symbolizes" (abstract/concrete)
distinction. What you struggle with is INTELLIGENCE.
> It sounds like you're saying that patterns of the Intellectual kind
> include the understanding that they are purely representative.
Close but not quite. Not in the sense that the other levels are "real"
and intellect "represents" them, this is the fallacy that Pirsig
commits at the beginning of the "symbol manipulation" definition:
Intellectuality occurs when these customs as well as
biological and inorganic patterns are designated with a sign
that stands for them and these signs are manipulated
independently of the patterns they stand for. "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.
Intellect is the value of the "real/representative" distinction.
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/
