[MD] Intellectual and Social

[Bruce Underwood]

Hello All,
Perhaps I am too new to this to jump in here, but I see a need to define what I call "Struggles" between the levels and "Struggles" within the level.  The advantage of defining these "Struggles" is to provide the ability to view any problem from a perspective and advantage of the MoQ that has perhaps never been achieved. It is how these levels interact within between each other and within.
Struggles:
   Inorganic Static Patterns  Reducing to Subatomic Particles 
   Inorganic Static Patterns against other Inorganic Static Patterns 
   Between Biological and Inorganic
   Between Biological and Biological
   Between Social and Biological
   Between Social and Inorganic
   Between Social and Social
   Between Intellectual and Social
   Between Intellectual and Biological
   Between Intellectual and Inorganic
   Between Intellectual and Intellectual   

Thanks,

Bruce


[Matt]
> Steve said about his idea:
> It comes from Wim. Remember him?
>
> Matt:
> Yes, I do: Wim Nusselder. We started writing here at just
> about the same time. I liked him.
>
> Steve said:
> I'm not sure that it makes sense to say that the train of
> thought needs social patterns to intercede. Intellectual
> patterns are social through and through by the "mythos
> over logos" argument.
>
> Matt:
> Heh, well, I think pretty much everybody misunderstood
> what I was saying here. I wasn't saying, as I think Mary
> said and everybody jumped on board in thinking that's
> what I was saying, that social patterns control intellectual
> patterns--I was trying to identify a way of thinking about
> how they interact. The question is: since inferential
> thinking can continue on indefinitely, how is it that we
> stop? Habits of satisfaction, conclusions to problems we
> are pleased with, was my answer--these habits take on
> something we could call "authority."
>
> Since the patterns at different levels _must_ interact,
> people do need an answer to that question. They do
> need to specify how the levels interact.
>
> The thing to particularly bear in mind is how you balance
> the opposite philosophical intentions of the
> mythos-over-logos argument and the "distinctness"
> clause in Pirsig's articulation of the levels. The former is
> reductionistic--where Platonic philosophers wanted to
> draw a big, bright sharp line between logos and mythos,
> anthopologists were saying, "Nah, nah--not so fast."
> The latter clause is anti-reductionistic--these specified
> levels are different beasts for definite and specifiable
> reasons. It's defining the specification we've been
> having trouble with all these years.
>
> In the set-up I offered, I was suggesting how the
> intellectual interacts with the social, and then the social
> with the biological level, to thus produce action from a
> thought (remembering Pirsig's claim that you can't leap
> levels).
>
> I don't have any particular stake in this game, and so I
> have no other thoughts, except that I would urge that
> everyone who thinks that need to understand the
> Metaphysics of Quality take it as a necessary piece that
> articulation of how--in a definite kind of way--the levels
> interact with each other. That's what I don't think Pirsig
> ever did, and it's led a lot of confusion (and/or creative
> interpretation like the above).
>
> Matt
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390708/direct/01/
> 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/
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390709/direct/01/