[Ian] [main] I want to talk about the intellectual level (in the title); such as working definitions of intellect and intellectual quality; and in particular what MoQ adds to intellect - a question I've expressed economically as "What distinguishes MoQ-enlightened-intellect from GOF-SOMist-intellect?" [/main]
[Arlo] And I've answered this. [Arlo previously] As I said earlier, "SOMist" refers to a view that holds subjects and objects as primary. So, what distinguishes 'SOMist intellect' from 'MOQish intellect' is the in the former there are pre-experiential 'objects' and in the latter there are patterns of value that derive from the experiential moment. This relates to Paul's context one. Coming into 'MOQish intellect' from this epistemological position, we are able to 'ontologically' consider intellectual patterns to be "pragmatic high quality explanations of how the world operates in accordance with the assumption that values are the ubiquitous, empirical element of an evolving universe." (Turner) Simply, the difference between 'SOM' intellectual patterns and those relating to the MOQ is whether or not 'subject' and 'objects' are primary to experience. GOF-SOMist-intellect: subjects and objects are primary MOQ-enlightened-intellect: Quality is primary GOF-SOMist-intellect: statements are descriptions of reality MOQ-enlightened-intellect: statements are "pragmatic high quality explanations" The problem is, to go all the way back to the beginning, is that you want to equate 'coherence' with 'objectivist/scientistic/SOMist' (along with definitional and logical), and this is a misuse of the term "SOM". 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
