Hello Platt. > > I'm using "intellectual concepts" as a catch all for ideas, explanations, > > and > > language that does not stem from direct experience. These things can lead a > > person to an experiece. But in themselves, because they are not the > > experience, > > they have no affective power. > > Hi Kevin, > > The intellectual concept of individual sovereignty that guided the Founding > Fathers didn't stem from direct experience, but it did have, and still does > have, tremendous affective (and effective) power. So I respectfully disagree > with that part of your statement regarding what's missing in defining the > intellectual level. But that's a minor quibble. The role of the individual as > the missing element in the description of the intellectual level we agree on, > so I suggest we keep our focus on that main point, at least in this thread. Let's do both. Let's begin with a shared understanding of our disagreement. I propose the statement, "concepts have power to affect change in people." Do we agree that you take this to be a true statement and I take it to be a false statement? And can we agree that the statement is itself a concept? I'm sure you see where this is going. If you are right then the statement "concepts have power to affect change in people" could, by itself, affect a change in me such that I would change my mind about it. Thoughts?
Kevin --------------------------------- Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. 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/
