Hi Platt, >From your post, your interpretation seems to coincide with mine, unless I read it incorrectly.
Let me ask you the following questions: Is the intellectual level a function of individual thought? Does such individual thought provide the direction and structure of the intellectual level? Or, is individual thought conforming to an intellectual level, in the same way that carbon atoms (inorganic) conform to make up the biological level. That is, the structure of biological molecules must be such that they can be used by the biological organism. So, do our thoughts have to fit into the intellectual level once it is formed so that they become pertinent? Too many questions, I know, but hopefully you get what I am asking, what leads and what follows. Mark > > My interpretation of the individual's place in the MOQ hierarchy differs > from > yours. > > On 31 Oct 2010 at 8:54, 118 wrote: > > > > I[Mark] > Free market support points to individual freedom. For this reason, I > believe your answer to X's question and the subject matter would be that > you > value the individual (or biological level) as having the highest quality. > One doesn't have to choose of course, and the question is simply an > effector itself (let's call it the X factor). In this interpretation of > your responses, I would have to agree with you. The individual is not > subordinate to society or intellect as MoQ suggests with the hierarchy. > This would be similar to the trunk of a plant not being subordinate to the > forest and flowers on one side, and the roots on the other. It comprises > the individual component, and shines from its own merit. > > [Platt] > In the past I have argued that the Intellectual Level should be properly > renamed the Individual Level The reason is quite direct: only individuals > are > capable of creating intellectual patterns. A new idea is generated by a > single > person at a distinct place and time, not by collectives. > > Of course, individuals occur at all levels, whether an individual atom > (inorganic), germ (biological) or nation (social). But, as this site and > all > idea interchange demonstrates.intellectual patterns emerge not from groups > but > from individual minds. Furthermore, just as no two individuals have the > exact > same DNA and no two have the exact same values, no two have the exact same > ideas. (At the lower levels, differences between individuals are > indistinct.) > > There are other points to make, but enough for now. For me, individual > freedom > fosters creation of intellectual patterns as well as the free expression > thereof. As Pirsig says, individual rights like freedom of speech, of the > press, of religion, etc., all idea protections, " -- established the > supremacy > of the intellectual order over the social order," i.e, individual freedom > trumps social conformity and reigns at the highest moral level. > > Platt. > > > . > > > 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
