[MD] What's missing

[skutvik at online.no]

Arlo, Kevin, Platt, Ron, All (more to come)

Thanks a lot for your responses to my quiz. As I emphasized the 
"in a MOQ context" I had hoped for the obvious answer, namely 
that SOM is missing, but of course everyone saw the catch, if so 
intellect=S/O and that is anathema. Anyway I begin by this from 
Arlo to Kevin.    

19 Mar. Arlo Bensinger wrote:

> [Kevin]
> If I had to guess I'd say Pirsig's view of intellectualism is 
> intimately tied to his notions of individualism.

> [Arlo]
> According to the MOQ, intellect emerges from social patterns.  Are you
> saying that an "individual" only arises out of social interactions? (I
> agree with this, you know. The "I" is a social semiotic construct that
> allows categorization and pragmatic activity. But this interplay,
> individual-social, is precisely what describes the social level.)

I agree with Arlo (again) the "individual" and various derivatives - 
"self" and "self-awareness" ..etc. - has been well-meaning 
definitions of intellectual VALUE, but still miss the mark. This is 
as much characteristics of the social reality.   

[Arlo]
> Falsely replacing the intellectual level with the "individual level"
> is just another S/O tactic for validating the delusional separation we
> experience. Platt's adherence to the "Great Man" view of history is
> another. This falsely heroic account paints the majority as dumb
> buffoons, struggling thoughtlessly and blindly, until here and there a
> Great Man (such as his use of "Aristotle") arises to carry all of us
> on his back. Historical progress is made not by some Great Hero
> leading the way for the poor wretched masses, but by the
> understandings that arise out of thousand or millions of daily
> interactions, carried out within (nay, "through") a social milieu.

Even if Arlo here sees an opportunity to kick Platt's behind ;-) I 
still agree with him. The individual was surely a big social issue. It 
may be added that the dominant figures of old claimed to have 
their wisdom, power ..etc. from Above, the biblical prophets 
receiving stone tablets and holy texts from God, the Egyptian 
Pharaohs BEING gods themselves. While the intellectual leading 
figures claimed objective knowledge fetched from observation.   

The 19th. Ron wrote:

> Bo,
> I had the opportunity to see "300" over the weekend.
> Lieniedus made an eloquent speech before battle about
> Living in the light of reason rather than fear and myth
> That this must be defended and allowed to grow.
> Perhaps when people no longer feared their gods and
> Were free to contemplate did intellect bud.

> -R

"300"? Is that a film? Is it the one the Iranians didn't like, about 
the Greek vs Persians ? Anyway I think this about says it - even if 
a bit "hindwisdom", the Greeks and/or Macedonians surely had 
not yet formed such lofty concepts as reason or freedom from 
fear .. etc. Yet aware or not, the said struggle had in it the seed of 
things to come. Before I know if we speak about the same thing I 
don't dare to elaborate, but what's for sure is where the (middle) 
"East" social reality butts against the intellectual "West" there is 
trouble. Even where the - oh just say it - Islam world has infested 
the (IMO) post-intellectual Far East their notorious fear tactics 
flourish.

IMO

Bo