[MD] Regarding The Fundamental Nature of The Intellectual Level

[Christoffer Ivarsson]

Bodvar, Joe, Marsha, all

(Sorry for the delay in answering Bo. I've elaborated a bit now, especially 
in the last bit, and I think it needs some Good criticism =D )

[Bodvar]
You are right, but the discussion seems to have given up on
"intellect" - on the MOQ as well, nowadays it looks like a contest in
NOT mentioning Pirsig or his ideas.

[Chris]
Yes. Even the MOQ_discuss can become to static it seems.

[Bodvar]
All levels served its parent before breaking free and Pirsig postulates
that intellect's original purpose weren't to find the ultimate meaning of
the universe (ultimate knowledge) rather to help society find food ...etc.
but it's after the breakout that levels are levels, before they were
"prodigious children" (of their parents).

[Chris]
Agreed. The seed of the intellectual level is perhaps not one single thing, 
but it evolved as a part of the social level, when this social level had 
evolved high enough. When the first human for the first time asked itself 
the question "why?" that's the revolution I think.

[Bodvar]
(Quoting Pirsig)
"The intellect's evolutionary purpose has never en to discover an
ultimate meaning of the universe, that's a relatively recent fad.
It's purpose has been to help society find food ...etc".be

This however was intellect in its parent's service, after it took off on a
purpose of its own it did become a search for the ultimate purpose, we
see it first manifest as the Greek thinker's search for eternal (ultimate)
principles - for TRUTH - i.e. intellect's liberation from society emerged
as SOM in ZAMM. I's obvious.

[Chris]
Yes! Inventing better ways of getting food etc is not the intellectual level 
emerged, but when the Question "Why?" is asked for the first time, it is a 
product of the intellectual level, and NOT in service of any other level as 
such, even though, since it was week the social level could use it still. 
When the ideas of TRUTH came along that was long after the question "Why?" 
had been asked, so even though I will agree that the greeks brought IPoV to 
dominant position, I can't say they liberated it. Only developed it.

[Bodvar]
It's after freeing themselves from their parents the levels become
levels. This BTW solves Magnus' quandary about insect colonies, wolf
packs and ape tribes (as social value). These are society still in
biology's service, taking off on a purpose of its own was solely an
human social endeavour.

[Chris]
Precisely! There must be grey zones. There always are.

[Chris]
> The Quest for knowledge. Embedded in us since - well, pretty much
> always.

[Bodvar]
The emergence of intellect (roughly 500 BC) may seem like "always"
but humankind is infinitely older (ZAMM):

[Chris]
Ah, yes. But you and I differ on the point that your intellectual level then 
becomes only S/O. Or perhaps we don't. See, now I think that the 
intellectual level is, in essence "the quest for knowledge" - as this is 
clearly in conflict with the other patterns - and this, starting with the 
question "Why?", must perhaps have a basis consisting of the notion of an "I" 
to rest on.

This "I" notion doesn't have to be evolved into subject/object thinking per 
say, I think. All that is needed is that the social level and the biological 
components are so evolved that they produce some sort of individuality (and 
the biological capacity to store information and all the other nice stuff 
the human brain does) in which the question of "why" may occur in - because 
when this question is asked it is not in itself in service to any other 
level then the intellectual.

But then, how intellectual understanding evolves from that "why" (and how 
and all those questions that doesn't serve anything else but the 
intellectual level) can be quite different I think. So, the intellectual 
level may take other forms then the classic Greek one, and doesn't 
necessarily have to use a S/O thinking, it can be thinking in totally 
different terms, terms that inevitably will be most troublesome for us in 
our mythos to fully understand, but as long as those thoughts also only 
serve to answer the "Quest for knowledge"  - to answer the "Why's" and the "How'" - then it must be the intellectual level (even if one of the supposed 
answer were to say that there is no such thing as a separate individuality.. 
or Truth).



Regards
Christoffer