John, extra choclate milk and a cookie for you after nappie time! best answer yet
-Ron ----- Original Message ---- From: John Carl <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sun, April 25, 2010 3:12:19 PM Subject: Re: [MD] Reading & Comprehension Ok Mary, I'll give it a try. Its a really good question, "what should our intellectual patterns value?" I don't have a ready answer, but I like the question and I've been pondering it so in a conversational way, I offer some tentative ideas: First, every level sustains and perpetuates itself, right? Like inorganic rocks keep on being rocks which demonstrates they "value" beingness enough to keep their molecular matrixes all in order. Like wise, living beings want to keep on living, and social patterns try to persist through generations. So also does knowing value more knowing. We learn and conceptualize that we might have more powerful thought-patterns with which to know and conceptualize, infinitely. But the purpose of intellect, also stabilizes the so called "lower levels" as well. Like Marsha and a lot of people these days want to keep bees, because bees are in trouble. Intellect attempts to embrace the all, and cares about everything in its view. This is placing relative value upon everything it sees. It is man's intellect that has evolved to its position, in order to think about everything else. Since that is what it does, that must be its purpose. Pragmatically speaking, John On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Mary <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Andre, dmb, Bo, and all, > > In one way it seems we have no argument, but we actually seem to have a > huge > one. > > The question was, what does the Intellectual Level value, not what values > have made the Intellectual Level possible. > > What you and Andre point to below refers to the latter and not the former. > > You seem to be saying the Intellectual Level's value set centers around > human rights. I happen to think the Int. Level depends on human rights, > which is a huge difference from what you are saying. I think we would all > agree that science belongs in the Intellectual Level. It only has a chance > to thrive due to freedoms, but the freedoms existed before the science did. > The freedom from religious dogma, for example, made objective scientific > inquiry possible did it not? Ergo, the freedoms allowed the level. They > are not the level. > > Freedoms are beliefs, right? I believe we should all have freedom of > speech, inquiry, etc., and I am sure you do too. But, isn't the > Intellectual Level kind of antithetical to belief? Subject-object science > is not supposed to be swayed by beliefs. It's supposed to be above that > sort of thing. Which is my point. > > Now here I tread into dangerous waters because I happen to think that > modern > science is based on the "belief" that the world is composed of subjects and > objects, but that's the nut of our entire disagreement as I recall. Since > you do not believe that, you should be in the camp that says beliefs are of > the Social Level (religion, humanism, Democracy, etc.). These you (and I) > see as Social Level value patterns that are good, but they are not > Intellectual value patterns. > > So, I ask again. What are the Intellectual Level value patterns? ...and > am > I doing any better at making myself understood? > > Thanks for the interesting discussion, > Mary > > [dmb] > > I'd add to Andre's addition. > > > > One of the problems with our technological world is that we're > > continuing to use intellect for it's old original purpose, to find food > > and detect danger. The result is an exponential acceleration of crap at > > the expense of the natural world. Changing that status is a big part of > > what motivates the desire to expand our modes of rationality so that we > > don't do things in such a shallow, greedy, ugly way. > > Have you seen "The Story of Stuff"? It has nothing to do with the MOQ > > per se, but it gets at this idea of a more enlightened kind of > > materialism. Instead of tons of tacky junk, she says, we should have > > more reverence for our stuff, more personal engagement with our > > material possessions. > > The rights listed in our law and in the Pirsig quote are HUMAN rights, > > to be sure. But you'll notice how they all protect the freedom of the > > intellect itself. They're all about giving the truth a chance to be > > known and heard and wrestled with publicly. They're about restraining > > power from interfering with that freedom. Why? Because that's where the > > improvements will be formulated. That's where new philosophies will be > > born, where new scientific theories will be hatched and new religious > > geniuses will have to employ around the clock security. > > But seriously, these human rights are compassionate and that's more > > than enough to be in favor of them. What's just as compelling, though, > > is this desire to protect our best chance at a better future. Its job > > is to direct the development of society, I think, so that these rights > > are not just our ideal but actually and indeed the central organizing > > principle. If we really wanted 300,000,000 free-thinking American > > citizens, our education budget would be as big as our defense budget. > > For starters. > > > > > > > Mary to Ian: > > > > > > Digging ever deeper... So, Ian, I gotta ask ya (and DMB and Bo and > > > > all) WHAT is the purpose of the Intellectual Level. If we can > > agree > > > > that each level is something that has "taken off on a purpose of > > its > > > > own" and achieved "levelhood" because it wants/desires/values > > something > > > > different from its parent level, then what is the Intellectual > > Level > > > > after? What does it really value that's different from the Social > > > > Level? Don't pop off an answer too quickly, you guys. Think about > > > > this. I am... still. > > > > > > Andre replied: > > > Don't you read dmb's posts Mary?: > > > dmb: "Freedom of speech; freedom of assembly, of travel; trial by > > jury; habeas corpus; government by consent - these 'human rights' are > > all intellectual-vs-society issues. According to the Metaphysics of > > Quality these 'human rights' have not just a sentimental basis, but a > > rational, metaphysical basis. They are essential to the evolution of a > > higher level of life from a lower level of life. They are for real." > > (Lila 307) > > > > > > But I get the idea that you (and Bodvar, judging by his response to > > you) want something else again? > > > > > > What is it I wonder, if it is not making this world (including its > > people..yeah us nasties)a little better, you know, improving it a > > little, a little fairer, a little more harmonious. I mean, no matter > > how hard you try to force a square peg into a round hole, you are stuck > > with the notion that we are composed of all four PoV's. And the SOL > > certainly does not think so, that is why the intellectual level as SOL > > has such a weird (can't express it in any other way) 'status'. > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars > > with Hotmail. > > http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid= > > PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5 > > 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 > > 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 > 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 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
