[Bo] It sounds as if you regard the multi-strata intellect as wrong, I wish you were right, but I'm afraid it's dogma: Aretê (and the Native American version of it) the original good intellect, then SOM as a faulty strata and finally MOQ as the correct intellectual strata.
[Arlo] I don't regard a multi-strata intellect as wrong. I've said many times I regard the levels as broad strokes, with finer and finer gradations (in complexity and kind) all the way down. As such I've come to regard the MOQ as "fractal". Viewed from a certain distance, the four levels make a distinct pattern, but as one zooms in, one sees a recursion of pattern that, among other things, makes demarcation (or absolute boundries) impossible. But here you say something that runs counter to what I thought you had been saying. Namely, that Arete was "good intellect". I had thought you placed Arete firmly as social Quality. If you are saying that Arete was a pre-S/O intellectual pattern that was usurped/replaced by S/O intellect, we may be close in agreement. Given this, as you suggest, the pre-Socratic Greeks and the Amerindians had a "good intellect". The Greek tradition was hijacked by S/O metaphysics (as per ZMM), while the Amerindian intellect was never given dominance over society. As for the "politically correct" bruhaha, it runs both ways, but it only ever bothers most people when its "those others" doing it. One's own PC, or one's own party's PC, is typically either silently accepted or actively promoted while the other's is condemned. 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
