Dmb,
I'm not sure I got an answer, but the question is important. I think there
are more basic questions to ask as to how anybody defines anything. How do
you define conservatives or theists as anti-intellectual, unless there is
some absolute intellectual claim you have. If so, show it or prove it. That
sounds like a biased faith based statement to me. What's intellectually
sound about it just because its in your intellect?
What determines the validity of your, my or anyones's intellectual
understanding of any level of any thing? But I do like the distinction you
raised, and of course, Logos, meant different things in different societies.
So what level determines what. And how do you deal with the radical
differences between individual intellectual understanding in individuals and
in whole societies.
In Christianity, Christ is the Logos, the Logos who became flesh and dwelt
among us. The book of John opens with 'In the beginning was the logos, and
the logos was with God and the logos was God.
*
Joh 1:1* In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made
that was made.
Joh 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
Joh 1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it
not.
The logos that became flesh shone into the darkness, and the darkness
comprehended it not.
Does moq say anything about human darkness, and self-deception, and
blindness? (on a personal intellectual or social level)
Jon
<http://www.blueletterbible.org/study/tsk/tsk.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=2&t=KJV><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#conc/2><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#comm/2>
<http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#imgs/2><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#vrsn/2><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#dict/2>
Jhn 1:2<http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#comm/2>
<http://www.blueletterbible.org/study/tsk/tsk.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=3&t=KJV><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#conc/3><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#comm/3>
<http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#imgs/3><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#vrsn/3><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#dict/3>
Jhn 1:3<http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#comm/3>
.
<http://www.blueletterbible.org/study/tsk/tsk.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=4&t=KJV><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#conc/4><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#comm/4>
<http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#imgs/4><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#vrsn/4><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#dict/4>
Jhn 1:4<http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#comm/4>
<http://www.blueletterbible.org/study/tsk/tsk.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=5&t=KJV><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#conc/5><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#comm/5>
<http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#vrsn/5><http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#dict/5>
Jhn 1:5<http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#comm/5>
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 3:28 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> Mary asked:
> What is the Intellectual Level, and specifically, what makes it different
> from the Social Level?
>
>
> Dave replied:
> The first question we have all tried to answer since the discussion group
> started years and years ago.
>
>
>
>
> dmb says:
>
> The distinction Pirsig makes is a modification of the old distinction
> between mythos and logos. Roughly, that's the difference between myth and
> logic. For those who really want to understand what the social level is all
> about Pirsig recommends a giant four volume set on world mythology, namely
> Joseph Campbell's "The Masks of God". It's awesome. I think a lot can be
> learned about the difference between the social and intellectual levels by
> looking at the historical examples of the 20th century conflict between
> them, which continues to this day. I think this conflict can be seen in the
> news just about every day (Better take your passport if you plan on driving
> through Arizona) and even in this forum. I think that the long standing
> confusion over the distinction has a lot to do with the participants who are
> dominated by social level values and very much refuse to see them as such.
> In an effort to defend or promote theism, conservatism and various other
> styles of anti-intellectualism, the issue has been perpetually muddled and
> muddied. This obfuscation almost seems deliberate and malicious sometimes.
> But the difference between myths and logic, between ritual and history are
> easy to see even if it's hard to say what, "specifically", those difference
> are. I think it must be a lot like the difference between power and truth,
> safety and wonder. There is also something more organic about the social
> level, something less deliberately created than our modes of rationality.
> Myths and dreams speak the same language, so much so that Campbell says
> dreams are private myths and myths are public dreams. They predate
> rationality by a long shot. Myths are so old that it's just as accurate to
> say that myths created us as it is to say people created myths. To quote my
> coffee mug, "stories create people create stories create people create
> stories". The phrase looks better on a mug because of the way it wraps
> around to meet itself, but you get the idea. They're still with us in our
> dreams, books, movies, politics and advertisements. In all those dos and
> don'ts and tales of fame and fortune and guys in white hats. I mean, we ARE
> the social and intellectual values you're asking about and you should be
> able to FEEL the difference in yourself as well as recognize its movements
> in history and in our politics.
>
> And hey, check this out. Wiki's most basic description of "Logos" mentions
> a couple of Pirsig friends, Heraclitus and the Sophists, and one of his
> worst enemies.
>
> Logos (pronounced /ˈloʊɡɒs/ or /ˈlɒgɒs/; Greek λόγος logos) is an important
> term in philosophy, analytical psychology, rhetoric and religion. Originally
> a word meaning "word," "account," or "reason,"[1] it became a technical term
> in philosophy, beginning with Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BC), who used the term
> for the principle of order and knowledge in the Universe.[2] The sophists
> used the term to mean discourse, and Aristotle applied the term to rational
> discourse.
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with
> Hotmail.
>
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4
> 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
