John, (Marsha too) I had just turned my computer back on because I had a thought that I though might help me explain myself better to Marsh, and I wanted to see if I could manage a way to get it out. I'm not sure if I would have been able too, but...
> John: > > As could "intellect". So much confusion, even, it turned Bo's sol dark > and confused. [Tim] Bo and his SOL have come up so much, and I haven't had the motivation to go back and see what it is all about. If you could even tell me what 'SOL' stands for, so that I could be sure, I'd appreciate it. > [John] But the fact remains, that people do tend to have two > perspectives on things, a classical, analytical perspective and a > romantic > aesthetic perspective. That these perspectives are hardwired into our > physical being, ought to tell us something about their very > fundamental-ness > and give them the proper place. For as I am seeing it now, it's this > very > differentiation of mentation, which gives rise to the understanding of > "intellectual", which otherwise would have no meaning whatsoever, and > this > epistemological value of differentiation should not be discarded lightly. [Tim] I think that there is a lot here I can connect with, but there is a lot there. I think that it might have to stew in me for a while. Certainly I do not intend to discard it lightly! > >[Jon] What seems to be happening, is that this isolated pattern of > intellect-that-values-intellect, is a kind of death force at work in > society > and the individual, which does not want to be impinged upon by > touchy-feely > emotional crap, and in its austere coldness, wishes to squash all of > reality > under it's iron heel. And ought to be resisted. I've called it > "homotheism" in the past as it puts as it's highest value, sameness and > controllability. You see it in any large authoritarian pattern of > government. > [Tim] I'm not sure where the sameness comes in... But controllability... I wonder how your ideas, which I can just touch right now, will compare with the thoughts I have regarding the fear of, or the inability to deal with, or the unwillingness to accept, etc. living amidst the unknown. > > > [Tim previously] Intelligence is a balance of the heart, (anything else?), > > and the mind > > (coin flip to determine the order ... the cold and the hot; though I > > don't know that that makes it a lukewarm!). > > > >[John] I think we should strive for balance in the realization of extremes, > rather > than the lukewarm middle. It's like, when you know what your extremes > are, > then you can go the limit in any circumstance, depending on what's called > for. But when you just stick with one horn, you're gored. > > As far as precedence between the two, I give it (along with Dewey and > Pirsig) to Art. For in the end, rationality is an art and thus (as > you've > heard before!) It's art, all the way down baby. :-) [Tim] I think it is here that you have given me the link I needed to express myself to Marsh. This arty, feely, aestheticy thing is what I was getting at with 'heart' - when I said that I was in your camp. However, I think the intuition that had me insert 'anything else?' is what I need to make it come together - without it even the finest art would be torture (I had made the contention, to Ham, that pure sensibility would be torture). There is an intellectual aspect surrounding DQ! One has to be able to choose to quit the particular art that, if forced upon him long enough, would be torture. This will of the I is vital. And, since when we come out the other side of the doorway of DQ, we must decide before we know what we are deciding: pre-intellectual awareness, we have to have some aspect of pre-awareness choice. There is so much we might be aware of at any moment, but the choice to be aware of that specific locale of reality came prior to it. (Either this is effifying DQ) or else there is a third intellectual component (at least) which is the intelligence needed to choose amidst this unknown. It seems that there is a counterpart (for balance) on the front end too: a willful act requires a choice at the front (what is important, best), and with this in possession, some sort of _____________ (what?) which predisposes the 'I' to a preparedness for the future that is to come. A faith aspect to intelligence if you will. I think we see eye to eye on the lukewarm versus balance business. :-) > > > > > > > Anyway, this is what the analogy looks like in a picture: > > > > > > >+--+< > > > > > > Tim > > -- > > > > > > Here's mine, derived from yours. > > iiiiiiiiiiiiii > >-0-0-< > i__i > > > Graphical idealism at play! > > John [Tim] probably no better way to 'deal with it' than by play! Tim -- [email protected] -- http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... Fastmail... 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
