[John Carl] there is a logic to the fact that the only way to intellectually resist social pressure is individually.
[Arlo] Both biological and intellectual patterns resist social patterns. Your conflation of intellectual and individual does not recognize that 'individuals' and 'collectives' exist on all of the MOQ's levels. It's simply a matter of the focus of your lens. Also, keep in mind that 'activity' (in this case the means to intellectually resist social power) is through a collectively mediated (and appropriated/internalized) symbolic structure (language, of course is the 'macro' example, but mathematics, and even say the semiotic forms of dance) that ONLY emerges through this social level of value. [John Carl] If you just prefer the beliefs of one group as opposed to another, you're taking sides in a social conflict but you're not really thinking for yourself and the distinction between social patterns and intellectual ones would be meaningless. [Arlo] Social conflict can emerge outside of intellectual resistance, social value is not simply 'thoughtless conformity'. And, rather than 'thinking for yourself' (which is cliche but philosophically misleading) I'd say 'participating in intellectual discourses'. Intellectuality, and sociality (and physiocality, and physicality) are active processes that occur within an 'individual/collective' milieu. Intellectuality, specifically, as Bakhtin argued, is a 'ventriologuated' activity; done though the appropriation of the voices of others, projecting towards an anticipated audience of future voices, and delivered within a culturally-salient semiotic-social media. As Siouxsie Sioux sang, "even when we're on our own, we are never all alone, when we're singing." 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
