> On May 27, 2014, at 4:57 PM, david <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Ron said to John:
> 
> The problem space is where American culture lives, but I would not say that 
> is where the contributors here at the MD live meaning the mental space deemed 
> the "problem". So attacking them as part of the problem does not support your 
> contention.
> 
> 
> John replied:
> My contention is what I make it.  I hadn't really thought of attacking the 
> problem of anti-intellectualism here in MD because everybody who contributes 
> here seems pretty intellectual.  Maybe too much so, but I gotta add that 
> intellect needs balancing sometimes, not suppression.  I think being in our 
> heads is good, we just need to be in our hearts also.   Attacking the 
> heartspace, because its not the headspace, is the wrong move.  imho.
> 
> 
> 
> dmb says:
> John, you totally missed Ron's point. The "problem space" is SOM, the problem 
> addressed by the MOQ, not anti-intellectualism. Even further, the criticism 
> is that your anti-intellectualism is connected to your failure to get out of 
> the problem space. That is to say, you keep attacking intellect here in the 
> MOQ discussion group as if it were SOM, as if it were still the problem.  
> 
> Ron replies :
Thanks for pointing that out, I was struggling with where I went wrong in that 
statement and how to clarify without driving John off. It was getting kinda 
wordy....
> 
> Ron said:
> What good is freedom when you are too stupid to make good quality 
> intellectual decisions? Is being a slave to biological patterns truly leading 
> a life that's free?
> 
> John replied:
> I'd settle for good social decisions.  Quality intellect is rare.
> 
> 
> 
> dmb says:
> Is somebody making a case for the freedom in biological values? I hope not. 
> That would be lame. I wonder what a good social decision looks like without 
> intellect doing the deciding. Isn't that what it means to have a society 
> that's guided intellect rather than tradition? 

Ron:
I was trying to tease out where John really stands when he uses the term
"Freedom" he seems to have a bone to pick with intellect and authority leaving 
only two places to go.

DMB:
> 
> One point really worth stressing, I think, is that we can never discern the 
> difference between good ideas and bad ideas without intellect.
> 
> One of the objections sometimes raised (against an intellectually guided 
> society) is that some ideas are bad ideas. Intellectual static patterns of 
> low quality should be trumped by social patterns, they might add. But, again, 
> we can never discern the difference between good ideas and bad ideas without 
> intellect. That's what we mean by intellectual values. It's not that we're 
> supposed to love every idea just because it's an idea. It's the quality of 
> the idea that matters, of course, and that's why we're supposed to care about 
> things like clarity, coherence, consistency with the evidence, honesty, 
> precision is the use of words and the relations between concepts. These 
> aren't arbitrary demands or oppressive rules used to squelch dissent or 
> anything like that. They are just some of the most common marks of 
> intellectual quality. Ideally, you want to raise this to an art form and 
> those will be some of the likely ingredients. The art of rationality requires 
> intellectual quality an
 d 
> then some. You gotta, gotta have it - even if it's not enough all by itself. 
> It's time to re-integrate the passions, the "affective domain of man's 
> consciousness," Pirsig says. Likewise, James says our best ideas will be 
> produced by thinkers who use ALL of their faculties. That's intellect in the 
> solution space, which is not to be confused with SOM (or with that mean and 
> cruel community college teacher who didn't like you).
> 
> 
> Ron:
Thanks for clarifying Dave, that is where I was headed with it. The ear marks 
of intellectual quality.
Social quality is lost when no one knows what you are talking about.
Or worse misunderstood .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>                         
> 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

Reply via email to