[MD] Some historical perspective

[X Acto]

On Oct 28, 2009,  skutvik at online.no wrote:

I would of course wanted a more radical formulation "Intellect occurred 
when language's words became abstract symbols symbolizing some 
non-symbolic reality. Yours sounds as if there was an "intellect" in 
beforehand that "began the process" (there was an intelligence) You 
see how Pirsig's own definition of the 4th. level (in the Turner letter)

"The skilled manipulation of abstract symbols that have no 
corresponding particular experience and which behave 
according to rules of their own."

28 Oct. markhsmit wrote:

> I am not fluent in Pirsig's correspondence.  Could you provide an
> example of abstract symbols that cannot be reduced to particular
> experiences?

On Oct 29 skutvik at online.no wrote

No that's impossible because the term "symbol" indicates the said 
dualism, as does "subject", "mind" ...etc. why I call them aggregates, 
you can't have one without the other. 

On October 29 markhsmit responds:
What the heck are you talking about Bo, are you completely
insane?  You quote something from Pirsig and then say that
it is impossible to talk about?  What was Pirsig doing
barking?  Get your wits about you man.  I know exactly
what Pirsig is saying, but I think he is mistaken.
I was asking for examples to see if I was wrong.

Ron butts in:
numbers, letters...

but I have experienced a nice "P"  and a good number "2".
: )