[MD] Intellect's Symposium

[David Thomas]

Khoo,
 
> The contention that the intellectual level arose, alone with the Greeks,
> from an Oriental/Eastern position is absolutely laughable, if one if
> familiar with the complex philosophies that developed in India and China.
> Any one making that assertion would not be taken seriously in this side of
> the world. In my readings of ZAMM and LILA, I did not get the impression
> that Pirsig took such a position. Alarm bells in my head would have gone on
> otherwise.
I did a quick search of Lila and I could not find a direct quote that says
that. I seem to recall that he was asked and replied something to the
affect, 'I don't see how the intellectual level could have emerged much
before Ancient Greece' and later wobbled with a comment about one of the
ancient Eastern religious text. My point is that whether this claim is real
or a myth it is just plain wrong.

And he explicitly states in Lila on pg 140: "Within this evolutionary
relationship it is possible to see that intellect has functions that predate
science and philosophy." Bo has to either overlook or deny this claim to
support his SOL premise.

> The impression that I got from both books is that Western Civilisation as we
> know it today, underpinned by social and technological advances based on
> science/ subject-object dualism  had its roots in the original Greek
> philosophies of Aristole, Plato and Socrates.
Right.
> 
> This in no way detracts from the assertion, that I believe Pirsig makes, in
> that as societies evolve, an intellectual level emerges, irrrespective of
> the context and geographical location, whether in tandem with other
> civilisations or in isolation. The value in this is that intellect now leads
> evolutionary development, rather than social drivers.
Agreed.

> Dave, what I am trying to say, or rather ask is, can you build a bridge from
> one side only ? 
I don't think the direction you start from is all that important. In real
bridge building it is determined by whole a range of criteria.
> A bridge from East to West or West to East has to be firmly
> built on foundations in both East and West.
But as you say you must eventually get foundations and approaches on both
banks.
>For a long while there was no
> idea that the East is important. And I can understand that. The East, Japan
> and Korea primarily have been assiimilating  a whole lot Western cultural
> and technological attributes, but has the West understood the basic building
> blocks of Eastern philosophy and civilisation for a foundation for a bridge
> to be built? 
No, I don't believe we have. It still is large measure considered "the
mystical East."

Dave

>> 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/