Krimel > [Krimel] > I find it incredible that any one would think that a particular culture > could spin off its own MoQ level. Why are we calling it the intellectual > level? Why not call it the Greek level. This would free us to talk about the > Chinese level or the Aztec level. Maybe individuals should be allowed to > play and we could talk about the Newton level or the Einstein level...
Mati: When we use a concept such as "Thinking" or "Thinking about thinking" as the basis for intellect then you might be right. Then what about that Axtec Thinking or Chinese thinking aren't they valid forms of intellect? But your definition doesn't give a basis for a pattern of intellect. Personally I don't care about which culture was responsible for creating the basis of intellect. However I think there is general agreement that the Greeks and in particular Aristotle provided us SOM. It was a basis from which the domination of social level had the capacity to end. There isn't, that I am aware of (Note that is a lot of things), of another metaphysical construct from a different culture that provided us or for that matter their own culture the ability to free themselves from the social level. From what I have been able to observe each modern culture has adopted the spoils of SOM, such as scientific achievements. What ZAMM and Lila shows us is that there hasn't been much change in the metaphysical basis for much of what we understand in the world around us. MoQ is perhaps the first major metaphysical breakthrough in 2500 years, time will tell. Respectfully, Mati 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/
