[MD] Intellect Worship

[John Carl]

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 10:46 PM, markhsmit <markhsmit at aol.com> wrote:

So, I am interested in the intellectual level.  Without getting
> too much into Wittgenstein (who I guess went from one
> circle to another), and not belaboring the point of the impact
> of language on philosophy, is language another aspect of
> dynamic Quality?
>


Mark,

The place I'm at in my thinking right now, is that language, as that code of
art which communicates between the social level and the intellectual, is  DQ
to the social level and the beginning building blocks of the 4th.

Does that make sense to you?  It sure makes sense to me.  You've got that
whole objective thinking wrapped up in a code blending continuously from
facial snarls and growls to scratchings on a blackboard signifying E=mc2.
 And sometimes used in academic circles to do both simultaneously!  A source
of confusion perhaps.

Or clarity.



> It is quite easy to be bewitched by intellect, and succumb
> to its enchantment.


especially if you're oriented that way.  Hmmm... an interesting thought
arises, generated by oriented.  Orientation... Sexual orientation...

Could it be that the mind is drawn to certain patterns of thought
(intellectual, artistic, musical) in a way completely analogous to the
attraction to members of the same or opposite sex?  That is, ingrained and
genetically pre-determined?

If you're oriented that way, intellect is as irresistable as any bar lady in
town.  You can't help it, the pull is too strong.  Look!  The breeze just
blew her dress skirling around her thighs.  Look!  An Idea just occured to
me!

I can't resist looking at either.  i don't want to resist.


> If one uses the philosophy of Wittgenstein
> for language (or that for thought, by Kant), are these tools by
> which one can understand the laws of the intellectual level.
> Is there a scientific approach (since really the demarkation
> between science and logic is a very grey area)?
>
>
 I feel the urge upon you a noble one.  it's not MY kind of task, all that
rigourous logic and math... It is very cool tho.  And I really like to have
someone who is good at it on my side.  Royce went there early in his life.
 But after his son died and then his good friend W. James, he spent the
remainder of his life focused upon a public philosophy and a philosophy of
community and loyalty.



> If so, I was interested in the applications of mathematical
> logic to Quality.  Math does not have the subjective language
> component to it, but is very logical.  Areas such as symmetry
> and group theory have direct analogies to MOQ, I believe.
> Has any one discussed mathematical philosophy?
> Wittgenstein became very scientific towards the end of his
> life.
>
>

I can only go so far down that road, and then my head spins.  All my life
I've hung out with nerds and smart people, I like 'em and they like me.  But
once they get going in their esoteric worlds, computer programmers,
engineers, biochemists... I can't keep up.

I have inklings... little attractions, flirtations with the classic side.
 But at heart I'm just a romantically oriented kind of guy.  Tell me a story
with your equations, and then I'll be able to follow.

Try Joe.   He speaks fluent math.  I don't know what he's saying, but I know
he's saying it.



> I am not saying that MOQ is based on math, just simply that
> expressions in math can convey similar intuitive understanding
> that logic does.  For example Quality = f(DQ, SQ), that is
> Quality is a function of dynamic and static quality.  If dynamic
> quality is acting upon static quality, then we can apply
> an equation that I brought up recently that is: Force equals
> mass times acceleration, or Quality is equal to static quality
> times dynamic quality.  Is the relationship multiplicative?
> Can we say that an aspect of Quality is the number of
> interacting intellects and the rate of interaction?
>


You know, said from a certain perspective, that would be entirely hilarious.
 C'mere baby, let me increase the Quality of your life with my rate of
interaction.



> Also, then it would be possible to determine if dynamic
> quality is changing in time, that is the derivative of
> dynamic quality.  Does dynamic quality go in spurts or
> cycles the same way that evolution describes other sciences?
>
> Oh, to many questions.  My background is in science so
> perhaps I am seeking understanding in the wrong way.
>
>
Ask Ron for some peyote or something.  You seem like you could really do
with some.  But overall I'd reassure you that being oriented that way is not
a bad thing.  You just need that ole communal balancing and you're good to
go.

John the loquacious