[MD] MOQ levels

[Ron Kulp]

Hello Steve,



>
> Ron:
> I define intellect as the relationship of the
> individual
> With their culture,

Steve:
This sounds like a very unusual way of defining intellect. Can you find 
a dictionary definition that is close to this?

Ron:
intellect  
   


Main Entry: in·tel·lect  
Pronunciation: \ˈin-tə-ˌlekt\ 
Function: noun 
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French or Latin; Middle French, from Latin intellectus, from intellegere to understand — more at intelligent 
Date: 14th century 
1 a: the power of knowing as distinguished from the power to feel and to will : the capacity for knowledge b: the capacity for rational or intelligent thought especially when highly developed.

Ron:
That being said the capacity may only be measured against the
social criteria Set. The individuals  assessment for the level
of intellect is based on their relationship with the cultural
body of knowledge. If one is well aquatinted and can demonstrate
this knowledge and values this as well as demonstrate the ability to make individual assessments of this knowledge in the form of abstract thought,
they are considered of high intellectual ability.
If one has a poor relationship with the body of knowledge and does not 
value it, they are considered to be of low intellectual ability.


Ron previously:
> How one relates may influence their social standing
> Within that culture and may influence intellectual values.
> My main point here for the past few weeks is exactly what you stated,
> That intellect and culture are two parts of one entity and may not be
> Reduced to levels in the traditional sense except by the relationships
> Previously mentioned.

Steve:
What is the one entity that is comprised of culture and intellect?

Ron:
Good Question, I'm tempted to say the human mind.