[MD] Social Intellectual

[Ian Glendinning]

Is that to prove my point Marsha ?
My response to an ad hominem from Bo.
Ian

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 2:48 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jul 22, 2010, at 4:37 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:
>
> Cut out the FUCKING PERSONAL INSULTS Bo,
> and argue with what people actually say,
> or just SHUT THE FUCK UP.
>
> I'm off to the hills .... sort the DICKHEAD out Horse.
> Ian
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jul 28, 2010, at 9:32 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:
>
>> Hi Marsha (and Bo), I see DMB already replied, but you addressed a
>> question to me (I think) ...
>>
>> The social level (like all levels, as I said) will keep evolving - of
>> course it's the patterns within it that do the evolving - they are the
>> species. It (its contents) will evolve into something different to the
>> current / pre-existing social level. As has happened already it can
>> and will evolve patterns that are part of the intellectual level - the
>> first such patterns that did so, evolved the intellectual level
>> itself. (as DMB said too)
>>
>> Next, I get confused .... are you still talking to me ?
>> None have demonstrated ... etc.
>> Do you think that if ... you understand .... etc.
>> There have been ... etc.
>>
>> I think you are making pejorative statements about people's behaviours
>> in general. As I've said before if you have such a complaint about me
>> I'd prefer it if you were specific with examples.
>>
>> My view - in MoQ-Discuss emails it is difficult to work with anything
>> but S's and O's - it's the nature of language - but plenty use
>> artistic rhetoric and poetics and links to parallel interests that
>> break the dialectic patterns. I wouldn't generalise the negative
>> criticism (if that's what it was).
>>
>> I think there is plenty of non-S-O / Quality thinking being
>> demonstrated, but clearly you have to read between the S-O lines of
>> the language to see the quality .... as we all did at least once with
>> Pirsig.
>>
>> Since Bo was the subject at hand .... Bo is in fact the least able to
>> argue his way out of his SOMist prison in my experience .... resorting
>> to insults when he doesn't understand an argument and never returning
>> to points made to him that might help us all out of that
>> straight-jacket.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ian
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:47 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Jul 22, 2010, at 4:37 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bo > Intellect is a static level - do we at least agree there?
>>>>
>>>> Ian - Yes, but like all levels it comprises patterns that are evolving
>>>> thanks to the action of DQ.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ian,
>>>
>>> Will the Social Level expand and evolve into something different than
>>> the social level?
>>>
>>> None demonstrate anything like an expanded intellectual pattern.   Do
>>> you think that to say you understand the MoQ, makes it so?  There has been
>>> no demonstration of anything but ordinary subject/object thinking, with some
>>> social/biological epitaphs thrown in for biological/social reasons.
>>>
>>>
>>> Marsha
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> ___
>
>
> 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/md/archives.html
>