Strange situations are my forte, Bo. Rest assured. On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 9:49 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Strange situation this: Most people insist of emotions being biological. > You agree with me that they are social, but then your "social" is far > down into the biological, so confusion remains.
It seems so simple a concept to convey, I don't know why it's not universally understood. Self is a socially created concept. Self is born of infant nurture. Those biological beings that engage in infant nurture, have a social sense and create and protect and perpetuate further biological being through social interaction. The more complex the social patterns flow from the longer period of infant nurture, with Mankind way, way at the top of the scale. This confuses people I guess, but obviously dogs are social creatures. We socially bond with them all the time. > IMO emotions in the > true sense are the Q-SOCIAL "expression", In order to have an emotion, you must care about the self, biological or projected. People get upset over insults to their intellectual ideas and heros! This egoistic reaction is obviously a socially generated pattern. duh. > As said horses are an highly complex mammal organism capable of a > rich biological repertoire. They are also very intelligent and live in > herds in the wild, but their intelligence is in biology's service, their > quasi-social behavior has nothing to do with the Q-social value. > > "intelligence is in biology's service" So is yours Bo. Do you know how to feed, clothe and shelter yourself? Of course you do. You also know how to get along with others, sense when the others close to you are in a pissy mood, or happy, or hungry or horny. All these realizations of other's moods are also shared by horses in a herd, whether their herds are other horses, or cowboys, or indians. And when you experience them empirically, you realize this fully. > > Well there certainly is a biological self as there is a social and > intellectual, but "ego" is an intellectual construct - the subject. > > Perhaps I am using a faulty term, definitionally speaking. I am speaking about that aspect of self that feels wounded when slighted, elated when praised. Pissed when misunderstood. What do you call that thing? I call it social, whatever term you want to use for it. > > Biological threat. God I'm tired of that term. What is a > > biological threat, anyways? Is starvation? Drowning? Eaten by a > > bear? Is it just a term for "fear of biological death?" It doesn't > > make sense to me, the way it's used on this forum, as if "biology" > > was out there lurking, ready to kill us. Biology is the life > > force, not the death force. That's as bad as those christians with > > their doctrine of "fallen nature". > > Used by who? No need to be coy Roy? > Pirsig. I guess I'm taking my complaint to the top on that one. But I'd accept any intellectual defense by a lackey. 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/md/archives.html
