Bo, The Social level seemed to emerge when the individual competition for survival diminished by forming Hunting or gathering groups. intellectualizing I feel began with language not communicative for Communicative started with labeling. Just when humans began to look at their surroundings and Ask why? Is speculative but I think the awareness of death played a role as we discussed. Perhaps death started the intellectual level and still figures heavily in it. All Religeons are death oriented to give life a meaning. MOQ is life oriented and perhaps Why it feels like a budding 5th. -Ron
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 12:58 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] What's missing Laird and interested parties. First. I don't know if it was you who opened the SOL(AQI) issue some time ago, at least I had high hopes that this would lead to an acceptance of this interpretation of the 4th. level, but you just dropped out. On 19 March you delivered an input in the "What's missing" thread so I take it that you still have some interest in the most controversial level. > [Laird] > Khaled, I hope you're right. I'd like to think that the social level > is stabilizing, much like the other levels did before. We certainly > don't see a lot of biological revolution going on these days either > (aside from our poking and prodding at stems cells in the lab). As the > social level increases its stability, hopefully people will start > thinking more abstractly as the norm rather than the exception. Then > we'll be ready for some real fireworks in the intellectual level. > Back towards the question of "what's missing?" - At some point along > our constructed timeline of history, a critical mass of the populace > began to feel not only the urge to think individually but the > acceptability to _communicate_ their internal dissent, to question > authority publicly, and to collaboratively look for better ideas. As > such, the intellectual level clearly has its roots in the social > level, particularly when our social level developed to the point of > people saying 'no' to authority from time to time (and not losing > their head for it!). If we regard (as Pirsig says) the age of the old Biblical books as pre-intellectual times, it's clear that there were lots of individuals who thought and expressed different ideas. Disagreement among themselves and disagreement with the rulers, disagreement between the mono-theists who returned from Egypt and the various godhead worshippers in the area, but everything was confined inside the god-centered reality. No prophet who expressed doubt in the God-myth (just calling it a myth is doubt) and/or suggested that such only exist in "their" minds having no objective reality ..etc.. Why is it so difficult to accept that what is described in ZMM as the emergence of the SOM also is the emergence of the intellectual level? Everything points to it; A taking leave of the Greek variety of the Mythological reality, beginning as an innocent quest for eternal principles, but snowballing through a few centuries into the first forms of SOM with Socrates and Aristotle. Still ages from the said subject/object and/or mind/matter forms and even longer from that of not "losing heads". > Sure, individuals play a critical role in intellectual patterns, but > they play just the same role in social patterns. Individualism (a > social pattern through and through) may have played an important role > in starting the intellectual level, but calling it an intellectual > pattern is putting the cart before the horse. Now, your're talking!! So disregard if the before is me misunderstanding you completely. The individual and "celebrity" were very much part of the social reality the highest celebrity that of being declared gods themselves. As said the OBJECTIVE attitude is what most clearly characterizes intellect, even if there exists belief in the paranormal these days we see intellect's footprints even here: Experiments, instruments, observation, "studies"... etc. In the said Biblical times this attitude wasn't conceived of, the "paranormal" was their normality. > Well, there's my two cents. Hopefully I'll have more time to read and > contribute soon! See you soon. Particularly interested in your: "Then we'll be ready for some real fireworks in the intellectual level. Bo 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/ 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/
