[John] Freedom to think whatever you want to think (intellectual) AND do whatever you want to do (social) but when intellectuals want to be in control, anti-intellectualism is moral.
[Arlo] Are you advocating anarchy? If not "intellectuals", then who should be in charge? Clergy? CEOs? Also, by what rationale do you advocate "freedom" to do "whatever you want" for the intellectual and social levels but not the biological level? Does "freedom" only pertain to social and intellectual activity? Why not biological? [John] He says that sometimes anti-intellectualism is good. You prat on about fascism as anti-intellectual but there's a very intellectualized attempt at social control going on there. [Arlo] "Anti-intellectualism" is never good. There is a difference between advocating for an expansion of intellect (as Pirsig does) and suppressing reason to social control. More specifically, you are conflating "anti-SOM" with "anti-intellectualism", a mistake made by those who continue to mistakenly equate SOM and intellect. 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
