Hi Bruce: > On 22 Dec. u wrote: > >> I think the line is blurred as to when intellectual pattern began, but >> feel that it began when people began teaching other people skills. I >> think several things came into play to form the intellectual level: 1) >> Language was developed 2) knowledge was recognized in the form of >> memory 3) Written Language developed >Bo: > When the intellectual level began is dependent on how it is defined > and after years it has shifted from the initial mind-like (thinking) one to > the correct S/O, and if so its start (in the Western world) is described > as SOM's emergence in ZAMM.
Steve: Bruce, you should know that Bo's mission here is to promote his own twist on Pirsig's philosophy rather than the MOQ. I would have no problem with his doing so if he didn't present his views as "the real MOQ." Bo believes that Pirsig actually got his own philospohy all wrong in Lila by not equating the intellectual level with subject-object metaphysics and creating a "metalevel" to refer to the MOQ itself rather than calling the MOQ an intellectual pattern of values. (He sees a big "container logic" problem.) Bo claims to be the only one (exclusing even Pirsig himself) who understands the true meaning of the MOQ. All this is not to say that it is not worth talking to Bo (if you can make heads or tails out of his words above)--just that you should recognize that he is promoting an interpretation that Pirsig has personally responded to and rejected on multiple occasions. Bo: > If it started with people teaching each other skills it began with animals > and birds that obviously learn skills from each other. If language was > the intellectual hallmark it began deep down in the social level (I > recently heard that the Neanderthals "had language"). Knowledge > ditto, if merely "how to" it's social, after the Greeks it became > "objective knowledge" and that's the proper intellectual LEVEL. Written > language likewise. Steve: Bo is correct that language is a social pattern in that the symbols in a given language are not biological since they are not maintained throug DNA but are instead passed on as all social patterns are through unconscious copying of behavior. These copied behaviors are a set of patterns of value that we could call a culture that is passed down from generation to generation. Pirsig has stated that the social level should be limited to humans for clarity, but I think it is reasonable to think of social patterns exiting among other mammals. I don't think birds teach one another anything but I could be wrong. I think it is clear that mammals do copy the behavior of other mammals (e.g, monkey see-monkey do and "aping.") and there is something like chimpanzee culture where practices differ from one isolated group to another. What other mammals do not seem to have are symbolic representations of social patterns (language) where the symbols can be manipulated according to "rules" (intellectual patterns of value) independently from what they symbolize. So I think that you are correct that language is a prerequisite for intellect though we can think of a given language as a social pattern while we can think of the use of language as being potentially intellectual. But these sorts of issues -- do animals have social patterns? when did the first social or intellectual pattern emerge? -- are not so important as understanding what intellectual value is and what social value is. Intellectual quality is fairly simple since the word "truth" usually sums up pretty well what is usually meant. If you can't qualify a pattern as either true or false or as having to do with truth, it probably isn't an intellectual pattern. Bo said: >> The intellectual level began when the social level realized that they >> could overcome the "memory barrier" of the biological level (death) by >> passing skills to other generations via language. Steve: Bruce, if you keep straight that the levels are shorthand for collections of types of patterns of value you will be successful in avoiding such problems as Bo is having above in personifying levels in having "realizations." Bo also tends to talk about the levels as different realities. Best, Steve 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/
