[MD] Regarding The Fundamental Nature of The Intellectual Level

[Christoffer Ivarsson]

> From: "Ian Glendinning"

> Chris,
>
> You may hold that counter view to DMB's (and my) assertion - but you
> need to address the arguments. (My telos points are relevant, but
> ignored. It is no accident that knowledge contributes to real life
> progress.)


Maybe I missed something - would you indulge me and re-post your arguments 
against my case - outlined?

> A pity you didn't address Mati's points in his thread, where I had
> already replied separately.

What points? The one about language?

> If we just express I like X better than Y, and don't separate the
> specific points / arguments - connecting the arguments to the specific
> points - we are going to get nowhere.

Well, I don't think I did that, I thought that I should clarify what I 
meant - ant that that was being called for - but please, post your arguments 
aginast what I said (as outlined as  you can) and I will think about it and 
get back to you

Best Regards

Christoffer




> On 7/16/08, Christoffer Ivarsson <IvarssonChristoffer at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Mati, Ian, Bodvar, Everyone
>>
>> Mati provided some questions for us to ponder around, and I think it was 
>> a
>> very good thing that he did. Ian - I read your post, and I hope that this
>> answer will provide you with the input you are looking for from me - it 
>> it
>> doesn't, ask me again if I missed something.
>>
>>
>> > 1. How does your definition or understanding of intellectual
>> > level/value differentiate the social level from the intellectual level 
>> > as
>> > well as social values from intellectual values?
>> >
>>
>> I think of the intellectual level as driven, at it's very core, by the 
>> quest
>> for understanding/knowledge. This Quest for understanding and knowledge 
>> is
>> at it's core not in service of anything else, because when you put them
>> alongside one another; the social levels core is that of maintaining a
>> social structure in the face of the continuing ongoing change that occurs 
>> in
>> every aspect of live and existence, and to do this it uses whatever means 
>> it
>> has to it's disposal - in humanities case even the intellectual level, 
>> but
>> in general the biological means it has subjugated. The intellectual 
>> level's
>> activity is continuously that of answering questions like "why" and "how"
>> and the like, Questions that at their core isn't asked in service of the
>> social level - BUT (I'll try to clarify this): The social structures that 
>> is
>> around when the intellectual level is working does influence the way that
>> the intellectual level works - I.e what this drive towards understanding 
>> is
>> aimed at. That is as it should be - all the levels exists in symbiosis, 
>> and
>> must do so. Moving on:
>>
>>
>> > 2. Given there is a evolutionary process to each of the levels, what
>> > is a possible historical point in which represents the likelihood for 
>> > the
>> > birth of the Intellectual level, and what is the basis for this
>> > period/event(s) chosen?
>> >
>>
>> The intellectual level would have emerged as a child to it's parent 
>> level,
>> and I believe that at any moment in history when a social structure 
>> becomes
>> so evolved (due to it's makeup and relation to it's biological 
>> components)
>> that individuality is formed and able to be a vessel for the questions of
>> "why" and "how"  - then the intellectual level is able to operate. Now, 
>> what
>> Ic mean by this is that there must be a notion of a self, seeking 
>> answers,
>> together or apart from others, before the intellectual level can start to
>> operate.
>>
>> Then, as the intellectual level is of higher evolutionary Quality then 
>> the
>> others, it can effect them, and change them, and so Intellectual PoV will 
>> be
>> created as something the social level holds up. Cultures will be created,
>> cultures that is social level and intellectual level creations in a fine
>> combination. Humans are born into them, and raised to think in certain 
>> ways,
>> so the social level provides a basis for the intellectual level to 
>> operate -
>> because the society was made into that kind of society due to it's 
>> relation
>> to the intellectual levels activities. If we take a pre-Greek society in
>> ancient Mesopotamia we may observe a society where people are born into a
>> society where the social level values are quite dominant, but the
>> intellectual level has provided the people with different kinds of
>> explanations to their innate question of "why" and "how" that the
>> intellectual level continues to give them - the answers will be "Gods"
>> perhaps - and so the intellectual levels provided explanatorily patterns
>> will be fitted to serve the social level - and be dominated by it.
>>
>> When a society is created where the intellectual level will have a 
>> stronger
>> position vis-?-vis the  social one, we will se that humans born into it 
>> may
>> more easily be able to follow their instinct to perpetuate their "thirst 
>> for
>> understanding" (the intellectual level) without this process beeing 
>> directed
>> so heavily by the social level. There we find the Greeks I believe, and 
>> thus
>> could they institutionalize reason and the idea of "Truth" into the 
>> social
>> level, so that the intellectual level could operate from these more free
>> conditions when humans with their capacity to follow the intellectual 
>> level
>> and evolution was born into that society.
>>
>>
>> [I skipped the third question for now]
>>
>> > 4. Given that intellectual values dominate it's parent level, the
>> > social level, yet must sustain and maintain a relative harmony with the
>> > social level. Given your definition or understanding of intellectual
>> levels
>> > how do intellectual values do that?
>> >
>>
>> I don't think the intellectual level dominates it's parent level fully. 
>> It
>> never really has. The umbilical cord is not cut so to speak, and so they
>> effect each other mutually, each of them fighting continuously for
>> supremacy, but so intimately intertwined that it is hard to see what is
>> what, and sometimes some things may be equality a result of the 
>> intellectual
>> level at work as the social level at work.
>>
>>
>> > I have read Lila and much of Pirsig's work and am very familiar with 
>> > what
>> > Lila has to say about some of these questions in a general context. Yet 
>> > in
>> > Pirsig's letter to Paul Turner he seems to have made his final
>> contribution
>> > to this question. In a private final correspondence with him long ago,
>> > about a research question related to this very question of intellectual
>> > values, he more or less has hung his hat his letter to Paul Turner in 
>> > his
>> > addressing the intellectual level. That being said, and with the 
>> > deepest
>> > sense of respect and gratitude for Mr. Pirsig, I feel that we have 
>> > failed
>> to
>> > really move forward on this question. Again I think Bodvar's approach,
>> > begins to provide the capacity to approach these, I believe, essential
>> > questions. Thus providing us with the capacity to move MOQ forward.
>> >
>>
>> I agree with you fully. And I too think that Bodvars approach is a far
>> better one then the other one. What I try to do now is to mud through it
>> all. I have only just started with all this, and all of you - well many 
>> have
>> been at it for the majority of my lifetime. We are all just seeking 
>> Quality
>> answers though - and I intend to do quality work with this.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Christoffer
>>
>> PS. Ian wrote:
>> > [Quoting DMB] "knowledge exists not for its own sake but to improve the
>> > quality of our lives, to guide future action and generally to make the
>> > world a better place."
>> >
>>
>> > I'd agree this is the main objection to your suggestion.
>> >
>>
>> I don't think this objection holds up. Mainly because I don't agree with 
>> the
>> assertion. Our strive for knowledge may lead us to find better ways to a
>> more comfy life - but that may have to do with the relation to the social
>> level, and most of all, the drive to understand things doesn't 
>> automatically
>> lead to this - at it's core.
>>
>> IMHO
>>
>> DS