[MD] Distinguishing Levels

[Arlo J. Bensinger]

[Platt]
Because you claimed you can take a picture of a society by taking  a picture of
a city. Ridiculous. You can't show a social pattern by showing a picture of an
altar or a judge's bench. Pirsig defines social patterns::

"In Lila there is a difference, although I neglected to state it. Cells are
objective.  Societies are subjective. No objective scientific instrument can
detect a society."

When your camera produces a photograph of the subjective, let me know.

[Arlo]
Okay, Platt. I think you're just baiting me here. But in the off-chance you're
actually serious in thinking you "caught me" in something, I'll take you
through it in three easy steps. Ready?

1. I KNOW cameras can't capture subjective social patterns.

With me?

2. YOU claimed a picture of an ant colony was PROOF ants aren't social.

Still there?

3. My response showed the FALLACY of your claim.

Got it? It's an "if... then..." argument. 

You see? If a picture of an ant colony PROVES ants aren't on the social level,
then a picture of my HOG group would PROVE humans aren't social. 

The point is, a picture of an ant colony IS NOT proof that ants don't belong on
the social level. Nor would a picture of a group of primates be PROOF that
primates aren't social. No camera in the world could capture primate social
patterns, and so you can't claim that by taking a picture of a group of
primates you have proof they aren't social.

Arlo