[MD] irony and socrates

[Ian Glendinning]

I give up Bo, This is agreed.
"Pirsig dropped the mind-intellect forcefully - he also said that it was
no use speaking about an intellect before the Greeks."

No point speaking about mind-intellect as a way of distinguishing it
from social - that's what I said - both involve (non definintive)
mental aspects.
It's now very old news how SOMist intellect evolved. The evolutionary
history is agreed, we've agreed that a hundred times over almost a
many years it seems.

Neither mental nor SOMist is a very useful definition of intellect
(any more). My point precisely.Not useful because it doesn't tell you
anything about how to recognize social and/or intellectual patterns -
now.

Regards
Ian

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:23 AM,  <skutvik at online.no> wrote:
> Ian
>
> 11 Oct.
>
> Bo before
>> > "OK, maybe the best "conventional" (SOM-based) book, but the ever best
>> > is LILA that conveys MOQ's view - had only the intellctual level issue
>> > been settled, but I feel now that David Buchananan is away that the SOL
>> > (intellect=SOM) is accepted, but you see the trouble, all who read LILA
>> > and its ambiguous 4th. level grabs the conventional "intellect = mind"
>> > interpretation. Your own position here is unclear."
>
> Ian:
>> So many things wrong.
>> No one is accepting SOM as the definition of intellect, with or
>> without Dave. And it's easy to see that the mental / mind realm covers
>> both social and intellectual communication and representation - so
>> no-one is making that mistake either.
>
> The same "effect" effects you. When Pirsig writes freely from MOQ's
> premises the "SOM-intellect" emerges like the new particle from a
> physicist's equation, but when asked directly it's so woolly that no one
> can conclude anything. Paul Turner asked (in his letter of 2003)  and
> Pirsig dropped the mind-intellect forcefully - he also said that it was
> no use speaking about an intellect before the Greeks ("Greek" in a
> MOQ context spells SOM) -  but to undermine this he added the
> "manipulation of symbols" definition which is the "thought-intellect" in
> a new guise and for good measure he threw in the "Oriental non-S/O-
> intellect" different from the "conventional" Greek intellect (as if there
> can be an "Oriental" biological- or social level!) In a couple of posts I
> have pointed to proofs of Pirsig's arriving at the SOM-intellect, and
> because no one protests I concluded that there is a general
> agreement
>
> Bodvar
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>