Ian said:
The paradox is that having conceptualised a high quality intellectual idea /
pattern, (using intellectual "freedom") it needs to be realized in the lower
levels (or remain forever conceptual). That realization through the social
level then depends on being able to "dominate" other social patterns using
things that look less like "freedom" and more like "authority" backed by
"force" and it starts to look more like a social pattern, even though it
originated in intellect.
dmb says:
I don't think that's true. Nobody ever defended Einstein's equation at
gunpoint. Ideas are protected or shot down through social institutions like
academic journals, funders of research grants, universities and such. Our
highest laws are supposed to protect intellectual freedom. The Bill of Rights
is supposed to prohibit any infringements on the right to free speech, freedom
of association, trial by jury, freedom of religion. The free exchange of ideas
is more valuable than the freedom to buy and sell things. Wouldn't it be nice
if Americans appreciated the meaning of intellectual freedom a little more and
cared a little less about his "freedom" as a consumer? I think so. Wouldn't it
be nice if we had a lot less "stuff" but every single thing we owned was really
well built and beautiful too? I think so.
"...a culture that supports the dominance of intellectual values over social
values is absolutely superior to one that does not." (Pirsig, Lila, p.311)
This quote raised two questions for Craig:
1) would a free culture that supports the dominance of intellectual values over
social values be superior to an authoritarian culture that supports the
dominance of intellectual values over social values &
2) would a free a culture be more likely than an authoritarian culture to
support the dominance of intellectual values over social values.
dmb says:
I sincerely wonder if there is such a thing as an authoritarian culture that
supports intellectual dominance. The first line of Wiki says, "Authoritarianism
is a form of social organization characterized by submission to authority. It
is opposed to individualism and democracy. In politics, an authoritarian
government is one in which political power is concentrated in a leader or
leaders, typically unelected, who possess exclusive, unaccountable, and
arbitrary power." I'd say very few forms of society are more hostile to
intellectual freedom. In some cases, the worst cases (Hitler, Stalin, etc),
intellectuals were murdered by the truckload. Authoritarians do not want any
kind of opposition, and they want smart opponents least of all.
Anti-intellectualism is almost universal among authoritarians and so I think
it's extremely unlikely that there has ever been such a thing as an
authoritarian that supports intellectual values in any meaningful way, although
rocket scientists migh
t be useful to them.
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3
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
