Hi Steve, You seem to want to criticize Bo to Bruce for deviating from RMP's MoQ interpretation, but then go ahead to explain your own deviation concerning the social level and non-human mammals. Hahaha.
Marsha On Dec 23, 2009, at 10:28 AM, Steven Peterson wrote: > 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/ _____________ Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars... 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/
