[MD] Patterns

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Platt.

17 Feb. you wrote:

Bo had said:
> > As said to Ron the 
> > individual has existed from times immemorial without transcending
> > the social reality. Some leverage outside it was needed and in my
> > opinion the emergence of the SOM fits. 

Platt:
> Agree, but the "leverage" you speak of was the mind of an individual
> who first split his experience and attached symbols to subjects and
> objects. It took eons before his newly invented symbols where adopted
> by others until finally they reached a tipping point to become the
> intellectual level at a time and place I believe you've identified as
> ancient Greece. SOM didn't magically emerge by itself.    

The MOQ rejects S/O as existence's deepest split and installs the 
Dynamic/Static one. And because mind/matter is a variety of the 
S/O there is no "mind" as a separate entity - as little as there are  
"matter". What you call "mind" is what I call "intelligence" and 
that has been around since biological brain. Its capability to "store 
experience [memory] and manipulate it" became social with the 
3rd. level and with language it grew to a power-tool, and when it 
began to probe beyond the social mythological realm the 4th. 
level was born.  As usual the upper level made everything into 
own  value and the 4th. adopted the said "intelligence", but now it 
became MIND, a subjective realm different from the objective 
world, hence SOM. Then finally the MOQ from where the level 
context is seen and in whose view the 4th. level is the S/O 
distinction (in the SOL interpretation at least).  I don't think we 
really disagree.      

Commenting some point of yours above. 

> "...an individual who first split his experience and attached symbols
> to subjects and objects. 

You mean language (which is experience symbolized, and 
intellect regards as subject/object-divided) 

> It took eons before his newly invented symbols where adopted by others
> until finally they reached a tipping point to become the intellectual
> level at a time and place 

Yes, language emerged deep inside the social level and it took 
tens of thousands of years before to reach the intellectual level. 
But I don't think ancient people knew any S/O divide - in the 
symbol/what's symbolized form or any other.  

> I believe you've identified as ancient Greece. 

I do, but why not accept ZAMM as the authority of what happened 
in Greece? It describes it as the emergence of Truth that along a 
long and twisted route resulted in "our" SOM whereof the 
individual possessing a free mind is a variety.  

Platt: 
> Since the brujo was tortured for his ideas and behavior by the social
> priests I see his example as an individual vs. society struggle. It
> was the brujo's intellect after all that caused the societal shift and
> his elevation from an outcast to leader.  

Societies necessarily consists of individuals and there are those 
who are more strong-willed than others and if ruthless enough 
they may become leaders. In the old social level days kings and 
such, in our intellect-dominated societies only presidents and 
prime ministers ;-)  No, the individual vs. society isn't always 
intellect vs. society, but - again - because "homo sapens" is the 
biological carrier of social vlue and society is the base of intellect 
there's always an individual involved.        

Platt:
> OK. I got lost about half way through the answer to a question I'm
> equally unsure of.

;-) No wonder, I wandered over to Ron's "cultural" idea. Important 
enough but irrelevant here. 

Yours sincerely

Bo