[MD] Intellectual activity

[Arlo J. Bensinger]

[Arlo previously]
That said, I see "Intellectual activity" as the participation in collective
dialogue aimed at creating, manipulating and sustaining "intellectual
patterns", which are symbolic-metaphorical representations of experience.

[Platt]
Except for the adjective "collective" which is a red flag to an  individualist
like me, this definition has a lot going for it IMO.

[Arlo]
Well, I'll agree that my use of collective here isn't the best. My personal
preference would be "... participation in cultural-historical dialogue aimed
at..." This emphasized that, in my opinion, "intellectual patterns" are formed
over historical time by many individuals adding to, substracting from,
modifying and changing, restating, reforming, etc. the pattern as it emerges.

[Arlo previously]
What do we do when we examine a Cezanne? We are participating in this dialogue.
As such it is an "intellectual activity".

[Platt]
No. We are participating in an aesthetic activity which has more to do with
Spirit than intellect.

[Arlo]
You're right, of course. Appreciating the aesthetic is at a higher level than
intellect. Pirsig's "Code of Art". I was thinking more along the lines, though,
of the "intellectualization" that occurs when one deliberately reflects on the
artist's use of symbols and metaphor.

Just as with mathematics, there is (for the few so gifted) an aesthetic to be
recognized, there is also the body of representative thought that can be
examined, and is examined on the intellectual level.

[Platt]
I might add that anti-capitalism serves the same purpose of elevating oneself to
virtue and power. Reminds you of Rigel doesn't it -- full of great ways for
others to improve at no cost to himself?

But while mi amigo Arlo and I may battle it out on the political front, the
definition of intellect remains on the table, and I thank Arlo for contributing
some fine ideas towards an eventual answer to the question.

[Arlo]
Rigel isn't only symbolic of "leftist" politicos, that was my only point. The
"right" has their share of Rigelism going for it. Let's just leave it that
whether or not one embraces "left" or "right" politics has nothing to do with
whether they operate from an SOMist paradigm. Fair enough?

By the way, ahem, the "collectivist" in me has to say that your statement
"contributing some fine ideas towards an eventual answer" is what I meant by
"collective dialogue". :-)

Arlo