Hi John, As far as I can tell, Rational works too. I believe the notion of the intellectual level takes us back to the glory before Kant came around with his critique. Kant spawned the Positive movement which possibly culminated with Wittgenstein who claimed that all philosophy is semantics. Metaphysics is just a nonsensical game to a positivist.
So, pure reason can be part of the intellectual level. But we have to be careful how we use that term, since it is much more than object manipulation. A book of reason does not describe the intellevtual level, just like a society does not completely describe the social level. The rational is one expression of the intellectual level, There is also the irrational part which can be analogized to the subconscious (for example). Often there are intuitive leaps which are later supported through rational means. It could be said that the rational description through SOM is the "end product" of the Intellectual level. But let's not forget the importance of feelings in the intellectual level. They are often more important than the equations that are being manipulated. On to SOM. SOM is a tool that is used by the social level to exchange ideas. We must create objects so that we can share them. When we transmit the rational to another we use a subject-object form of communication. Again, this is because we need to create something that we can exchange (like money). One cannot eat money but it is an accepted form of transaction so that we can eat. Same for SOM. It is not thinking, but a currency. Thinking is much more than SOM. If you listen to your brain, there are many thoughts going on at the same time, and they are more pictorial in nature. Our center of attention is continually putting these images together in meaningful ways, in very rapid time. The last stage is to convert these thoughts into linear expressions (grammar) which we then give to another. If you are interested in experiencing this pictorial manipulation, a good place to start is when you are falling asleep. Let your mind wander, and pay attention to your thoughts without trying to make sense of them. You will perhaps notice the constant arranging of pictures going on. Once you get good at this, you can do it at any time. It is often termed mingulness, although that process is a little more involved. Often if I am trying to figure something out, I just let my mind go free. The answer sometimes comes faster. This is why many good ideas come when one is relaxed (like in the shower). We cannot easily control our thoughts, they just happen. There is no central controller. If there was, what would be controlling that? However we can choose ones we like through attitude adjustment ( to use a silly phrase). One's attitude is also part of the intellectual level, but it has no words, so it is SOM free. So, SOM is like a telephone wire, it transmits information, but is not the complete act of two people having a conversation. Using this reasoning, I can say that SOM is not the intellectual level, just like a menu is not the food. My thumb is getting tired... Sent laboriously from an iPhone, Mark On Nov 28, 2011, at 2:27 PM, John Carl <[email protected]> wrote: > You've got a good nose for these things David. "Bo right, for the wrong > reasons" is what I smell too. > > And for so long, he patiently pointed out that there was problem, even > while doing it all wrong. And yet such loyalty to his cause, has had a > positive effect, I believe. If the others can just grasp it. > > Said the shephard boy to the mighty king, do you smell what I smell? > Way up in your palace (academic) halls, mighty king (of intellect) > > Always good to hear from an honest voice, howling in the wilderness, Dave. > > John > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:30 PM, David Thomas < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi John, >> >> In general I think you might have picked up the scent. >> >> Could it be that intellect as a primary emergent level is a myth on a >> metaphysical level? >> >> This morning I was watching a couple of videos of the series that Marsha >> posted ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sg-SGofRFo&feature=related) >> and under 21 Emergence and Whitehead the narrator says that these >> philosophers most basic levels were: physical, chemical, biological, and >> psychological. No social. No intellectual. Or that social and intellectual >> were secondary qualities (parts of) of psychological, not primary emergent >> levels with radically different properties. >> >> So Bo may have been right but for the wrong reasons. >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> 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
