[MD] Social level for humans only

[John Carl]

Platt:


> >John Prev:
> > Emotions are social responses.   Lizards and amoebas are biological, but
> > they emote not.
> >
>
> Bull yourself. What do you think activates lizards and amoebas, intellect?
>
>
John:  I choose to think in these terms -  there are three different mental
states (response to DQ) corresponding to the three upper levels of the MoQ.


Environmental reactionism - starting with the simplest forms of life,
amoebas and insects and reptiles

Intelligence - starting with mammals and corresponding to self-realization

Intellect - starting with SOM and corresponding to self-reflection.


> > [JC]
> >
> > Intellectual understand is DQ to a social pattern.  SQ is any stable,
> > long-lasting society or group.
> >
>
>
Platt:


> Say what?
>
>
Well, Islam, America, Christianity, the NFL - are all long-lasting social
patterns.  They were all creations of intellect and have persisted for a
while.  These are SQ expressions of the social level.

Is what I meant.




> >
> >  > [P]
> > > SQ at the social level is the Giant. DQ is accessible at this level so
> > long
> > > as
> > > SOL, with its absence of the concept of DQ, doesn't to try guide the
> > Giant.
> > >
> >
> > [JC]
> >
> > Poppycock (a polite term for "bullshit that doesn't get me bonked by Lu)
> >
> > SOL says intellect is SOM, RMP says upper levels are DQ to lower.  Your
> > statement, Platt, makes no sense.
> >
>
>
Platt:


> Check what Pirsig says about the Giant and intellectually guided societies.



John:

All societies are intellectually created and guided, to an extent.  Some are
more open to DQ than others, is all. I believe what Pirsig meant by
"intellectually guided"  was a matter of degree, or an extreme along a
continuum.



> > > [P}
> > > DQ is the purview of all who pursue the Conceptually Unknown in order
> "to
> > > bring something out of that unknown into a static form that would be of
> > > value
> > > to everyone." (SODV)  I agree such individuals are heroes.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Platt
> > >
> > >
> > [jc]
> >
> >  Well... I guess I'll have to take your word for it Platt, You are older
> > than me.  But I never seen such a thing in all MY experience.
> >
>
> Sorry about that.
>
>
> > [jc]
> > I mean for starters, wtf is "Conceptually Unknown" and if you know it,
> > doesn't that obviate it's label?
> >
> > If you knew what it was you wouldn't call it unknown would you?
>

 John:

In other words, it's an impossibility to pursue what is "conceptually
unknown".  Absolute Idealists and Pragmatists postulate that the self is a
constructive process.