[MD] Food for Thought

[ian glendinning]

Hi Case,

That's a recurring debate here, that one definition of intellect is
the ability to manipulate symbols. But I don't think it's good enough.
Once we move above level 2 (Life) to level 3/4 (Reflexive
consciousness, and symbol manipulation etc.) we have both social and
intellectual manipulation, and it's really culture that decides which
kind of manipulation is which. (As Arlo has clarified)

Ian

On 12/23/06, Case <Case at ispots.com> wrote:
> [Ian]
> But what I still struggle to accept as clear is any distinction of
> intellect from social. Don't get me wrong, I see a clear gradings of
> the quality of cultural concepts and activities, and can see useful
> social / intellectual labels, but this labelling seems entirely
> cultural. Sets of "principles" "accepted" as being valid, even if
> contingent on better ideas coming along.
>
> [Case]
> I would suggest that if the intellectual level is concerned or arises from
> symbol manipulation, its effect is to have completely subsumed the social
> level. The idea that people would act in anyway you care to think of without
> being able to intellectualize and verbalize a "reason" is unthinkable. I
> would suggest further that the best way to regard the levels is as fuzzy
> sets with clearly defined centers that blur at the edges. But I remain
> skeptical about their usefulness. Nice metaphors though.
>
> 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/
>