[MD] Zen

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting skutvik at online.no:

> Chris and Krimmel 
> 
> On 8 March Chris wrote:
> 
> > Uhm. Well, but what is called intelligence is boiled down to "using
> > your mind" Observing things, drawing conclusions etc. Surely you see
> > how this springs from the idea of mind as a separate entity.  This is
> > really what the practice of Zen is trying to bash. I don't see the
> > conflict. 
> 
> I believe we say the same thing. "Intelligence" is using brain, but not 
> necessarily for intellectual purposes. When "my" craw sits on the 
> ground tilting its head at the (small) bird's food, it clearly "observes 
> things" and in its brain the logical circuits "draws conclusions", but this 
> is intelligence in biology's service (finding food primarily) , but during 
> the Q-evolution this original biological pattern became adopted by the 
> social and an intellectual levels in turn. But while biology and society 
> don't know any inner/outer split, intellect's sees everything through its 
> S/O glasses; To it brain is matter and its "conclusions" is mind, thus at 
> the 4th level the terms (intelligence and intellect) are confused , both 
> are the mental fallout of brain's workings. 
> 
> 
> You see this intellectual fallacy with Krimel 
> 
> > Not to step on Marsha's toes here but your assessment above strikes me as
> > deeply confused. Reason is no less a subjective process than emotion. They
> > are both modes that individual subjects have available for apprehending
> > and processing information about the external, objective world.
> 
> He thinks that "all is subjective" is some profound revelation that no-
> one has discovered, he has no inkling that this is intellect's eternal 
> see-saw: To the materialist intellect (mind) assess the external world 
> objectively, to the Subjectivist the external world is mind too. There is 
> nothing but intellect!!!! This SOM-induced dead end is what the MOQ 
> upends, but no-one seems to have noticed and think along the old 
> beaten path. "Christ, it ain't easy" as John Lennon sings.

Bo's commentary appears to me to be a fine example of meta-intellect, that is
thinking about thinking. What the MOQ offers with its moral world and patterns
of values is a meta way of thinking that subsumes, but doesn't eliminate, our
usual SOM thinking. What do you think?

Platt
 


-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/