[Horse]
Before we get into another pointless political debate about the wonderfulness
of the magnificent individual versus the marvelous collective could we try and
think about this maybe from a slightly better perspective - i.e. mine! :)

[Arlo]
Your perspective is always good to hear, Horse. First let me clarify, I never
posited a "marvelous collective" to a "magnificent individual". Both views are
misguided. This is a dialogic pairing, to elevate one over the other is akin to
elevating night over day.

We DO have "proprietary awareness". This arises from our unique
bodily-kinesthetic experience in the world. But the "self" is more than this.
The "self" emerges only through the appropriation of the collective
consciousness (CC), when in dance with our bodily-kinesthetic (BK) experiences
a dialogic referential point arises. I no more elevate the CC over BK
experience than I find those who do the reverse misguided.

I do take exception, also, at a suggestion that places "Dynamic" with the
so-called "individual", and static with the CC, for the "self" is BOTH. Already
Platt has jumped on yet another rhetorical dichotomy to elevate the so-called
"individual" above his distorted notion of a collective consciousness.

Intellectual activity, the emergence of static intellectual patterns, arises
from the dialogic activity of social individuals. A singular "individual" does
nothing. A collective does nothing. But the two in dance gives rise to higher
levels (this is true for all MOQ-level relations). In this same way, Dynamic
activity is enabled by this dance, not by one or the other, and not in the
appallingly simplistic Randian model. 

A baby left on a deserted island not only would have no "self" (as we
understand it) but would be wholly incapable of producing social or
intellectual patterns. These things are only enabled by the interplay between
the emergent collective consciousness and the bodily-kinesthetic "proprietary
awareness" of the biological agent. 

And yes, "collective intelligence" is a misnomer to refer to this. Collective
consciousness is much more accurate. However "intellectual patterns", I must
point out, ARE collective patterns. They are the result of social-historical
dialogic activity. They do not arise from individuals-in-isolation, only
individuals-in-collective. Pirsig did not write the MOQ alone, he wrote it with
Kant, James, Dusenberry, Chris, his wife, his students, his professors, and
countless larger and smaller voices and echoes. He was (is) certainly a
"keystone" species in its development, but even his statement that he wishes to
see it grow beyond him into something larger reminds us that its "birth" is not
its "end". It is evolutionary, and it is evolutionary precisely because it is
dialogic.

His voice in one voice in a dialogue. Without the dialogue, the voices would
have nothing to say. Without the voices, the dialogue would cease. It is not a
matter of "static-Dynamic", but a matter or mutually-emergent  phenomena.

Indeed, I tire of this whole ridiculous debate, and its perennial devolution
into this "epic battle" nonsense. For no matter how many times we go round, its
always the same thing; if you don't wank off to the Glorious Individual, you
are evil collectivist who denies the value of people (witness Micah's recent
typical, and expected, distortions). 

"Proprietary awareness" and the "collective consciousness" are the forever
intertwined, inseparable, dialogic, yin and yang co-constructs of the emergent
"self". 

If you don't think so, let's drop a few babies off on their own deserted
islands for a few decades and then come back and see what wonderfully Dynamic
or intellectual patterns these proprietary agents create. Let's see how many
even have names for themselves, let alone write novels or invent things. Recall
Pirsig's accurate criticism of Descartes. It is not enough "to think" to make
an "I am". This must be preceded by "so and so culture exists".

Bottom line, its a dance, not a war.


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/

Reply via email to