[MD] Windmills and Intellectual Pots

[Mati Palm-Leis]

Paul, Bo & MOQ Folks,   

I have been slowly digesting the comments of Paul and Bo,(Also DMB, and
Mike). 
It is musing how quickly there is polarization on the issue of intellect; it
is enough to make my head spin. ;-)  

I will try to approach this from a slightly different angle. 

Paul on 12/19 wrote, "I think intellectual value patterns can be discerned
as those constructed by consciously following rules of valid inference."  I
respectfully take issue with this approach on two points. (Paul I am not
trying to nitpick on this or be a wise guy or acting stupid) First, why
"consciously following" the rules. Who is conscious and what does that have
to do with intellect? Secondly, how are the rules of valid inference
determined to be valid or real? 

I compare it with Pirsig's letter to Paul in which he defined intellect by
saying, "Intellect" can then be defined very loosely as the level of
independently manipulable signs. Grammar, logic and mathematics can be
described as the rules of this sign manipulation."  I seriously appreciate
Pirsig's contribution to advancing our understanding his perspective on the
topic intellect, but can't understand how this definition allows us to
discern deeper intellectual and social values such as are found in democracy
or human rights. 

I appreciate Paul approach as being somewhat "tighter" than Pirsig's
definition, but both I believe fall short in our understanding of intellect.
(Or perhaps I fall short in humbly understanding these definitions ;-)) And
here is what I am specifically driving at.  I think we can agree that
Aristotle's S/O split is a (I am stressing at this point(a) verses (thee))
basis for an intellectual value. 

a) Can either definition or approach to determine if the S/O, SOM, or SOL is
an intellectual value?
b) If so how?

Wishing you all a Merry Christmas,
Mati