Ian said:
Not non-intellectual or anti-intellectual, but the idea of intellectual but
more so, more evolved, more progressive kind of intellectual. (Forget any
previous coining of post-intelletual-ism, I'd like to avoid the errors of
history, not re-inforce them.)
How about it. An intellect informed by pre-intelletual radical-empirical
Pirsigian-quality is surely "better" than one that is not. Like GOF intellect,
only better.
dmb says:
In the MOQ "an intellect informed by pre-intelletual radical-empirical
Pirsigian-quality" is known as "intellect". And yes, the MOQ offers this
because it's better than one that is not "like GOF intellect," which is called
SOM or amoral scientific objectivity.
This is what Arlo was complaining about with respect to John's comments about
the relations between art and intellect. I mean, you have briefly described the
MOQ's solution, and opposed it to the MOQ's enemy, as if YOU were supposed to
be offering some new proposal, some new idea. If Pirsig already calls it
intellect in the MOQ, then the term "post-intellectual" implies that you want
to go beyond Pirsig's solution, beyond the MOQ's intellect. Unless you're still
stuck in the problem space with John. You see the problem? That would be
refreshing. Unique, even.
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
