[MD] Regarding The Fundamental Nature of The Intellectual Level

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Marsha]
I cannot say what you describe is done without deliberation and 
purpose, but they are not focused on the improvement of the Social 
Level, which is a part of the MOQ definition of the Intellectual 
Level's function.

[Arlo]
I think there are many examples of deliberate and purposeful social 
activities whose aim is to improve the overall social condition. When 
early humans began to cultivate food crops, rather than relying on 
foraging, the overall social conditions of humans improved 
considerably. When a new baseball stadium is built it may improve the 
social situation of that city in many ways, from increasing trade and 
tourism, to restaurant revenues, to giving families a place to bond 
on sunny summer afternoon.

That is, there is organic change from within the social level, it is 
not something "fixed" and reliant on intellectual patterns for 
change. Of course, intellectual patterns can exert a tremendous force 
on social patterns, changing them drastically. But if you trace the 
history of social evolution from earliest tribes of humans to, say, 
the pre-Socratic civilizations, you see a steady and purposeful 
evolution towards improvement in social conditions.

It is for this reason I say we are not talking about 
deliberate/non-deliberate or free/non-free distinctions, but 
differing levels of evolution in which deliberation and freedom are 
integral parts of each, just as automatism and conformity are 
integral parts of each. Too many, I think, are looking for 
descriptive differences between the levels (individual/collective, 
free/conformitive, deliberate/automatic, 
DQ-responsive/DQ-nonresponsive) when, to me, these are all part of 
every level, its just that the range of agency increasing 
exponentially as one moves up the levels.

When humans transitioned from biological to social beings, their 
range of agency was vastly increased. The range of opportunity for 
action, deliberate and purposeful actions, made the constrictions of 
the biological level appear to be a prison. However, this appearance 
masked the fact that the transition from inorganic to biological 
beingness also vastly increased the range of agency for biological 
creatures. The freedom of the biological level made the inorganic 
look to be the prison. On all of these levels, however, the beings 
within are given a wider range of freedoms than the previous. And so 
it is not a matter of "this level is free, that level is conforming", 
but "this level extends the repertoire of wo/man's agency 
exponentially". Conformity, or as I prefer "habituated activity", is 
evidenced as much on the intellectual level as on the social level. 
Indeed, the entire thrust of Pirsig's criticism in ZMM is on Western 
Intellectual Conformity, the static patterns that have produced 
habituated intellectual activity that reifies S/O duality.

It is the same with the individual-collective descriptors. All levels 
contain "individuals in collective activity". There is no one level 
of "the individual" and another of "the collective". All levels, 
depending on the context of one's focus, are the activity of 
"individuals in collective activity". This describes the inorganic as 
well the intellectual levels.

Yes, saw the spider on caffeine. Very illuminating. Or were you 
referring to the spoof video with the spider on crack?