Bo, First, nice dig at English as an improper language. My British wife is sure to give that statement a disdainful sniff.
I can't see it faintly matching your ..." RMP asked for some proof of > Egyptian cultures use of long chain of deductions before the Greeks", > rather him saying that the term "intellect" is ambiguous - at least in US > English - not so in the proper language where it means distinguishing- > between what's objective and what's subjective (... between reason > and emotions as my Oxford Advanced says. > wtf?? reason is objective and emotions are subjective? That's considered "advanced" at Oxford? Man, I'm not sending my daughter there, even if they do have cool shoes. Reason is a balanced weighing of differing factors, including the emotional and all emotions have some reasoned assumption as their basis. Therefore, the two cannot be separated quite so easily. British Objectivism sucks! (Sorry lu.) And what's the problem with seeing a distinction between intellect and intellectual? How about intellectual and intellectualism? These suffixes aren't just pasted on for good looks, they actually do mean something. The difference between intellect and intellectual is crucial to what Pirsig is saying, and meaning. Homo Sapiens might as well be called Homo Intellectual. Man has always had intellect as that is what defines man. Talking about man's ancestors isn't talking about man. It's talking about what came before man. But cultural valuation of intellect, is obviously a level above the mere fact of an individual man's intellectual capacity at differing times. Also, you miss the point that religion is created intellectually, and latched socially. But enough head-spinning English. John > > At least what can be abstracted from this is that although the > Egyptians were intelligent people they were pre-4th. level, later he > speaks of the Greeks as proper 4th. levels, and in a MOQ context > "Greek" spells SOM ...ipso factum. However, even if you all in turn - > Pirsig included - have affirmed the SOL, it has now become anathema > and no one can budge, I may have added to this impasse due to my > style. > > Style. Is that what you call it. I call it stubborn, unbending, inflexibility and it's more than a style, it's a choice. John 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/
