[MD] Pirsig's theory of truth

[John Carl]

Bodvar,

I have only an hour lunch now, Summer hours!



On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:31 PM, <skutvik at online.no> wrote:

John prev.


> > Mere intelligence of your "Stoned Age" wouldn't need to bother with
> > any mythical explanation of thunder.  All they'd need is the smarts to
> > come in out of the rain.
>
>
Bo:


> By "heavenly lights" I meant what we know as the sun, planets .. etc.
> but that's not the point, it goes for thunder and lightning as well. You
> witty comment is beyond me.
>

John Now:

What I believe, Bo, is that there has never been any time in human history
that there has not been intellectual - level thinking.  All your talk of
gods and myths being "social" is just silly.  Of course the gods and myths
are socially reinforced, just like our ideas of "substance" and "cause and
effect" and other ghosts of reason are also socially reinforced through
teaching.

But using the duality of social confirmation of an intellectual reality is
the only way I've ever seen humans exist.  If you have non-linguistic
humans, then you've got basically, just an animal.

If you argue the evolutionary development of a human from an ape-like
ancestor, I'll go along with you.  But I'll insist that until that ape-like
ancestor develops the uniquely human capacity of language (not mere
communicative grunting, but symbolic manipulation and representation) THEN
and only then do you have what I term, "a human".

And that symbolic language IS intellect.  All gods and myths arise from
symbolic representation of reality, and thus all are of 4th level, or
intellectual thinking.


John Prev:

> The desire to objectify reality in comprehensible terms is the human
> intellectual impulse, whether you're talking Norse mythologies or Big
> Bang, it's all intellect coping with reality, Bo.

Bo:

 The desire to order existence is Pirsig's "... no one can avoid
> metaphysics"


John Now:

The "desire to order existence" is mine and everybody else's that breathes,
or Pirsig wouldn't have said "no one" he would have said "I" as in "I can't
avoid metaphysics".

But this statement about "no one", if true,  is therefore further evidence
for my assertion that all human society forever  has intellectual guidance
of society  in the form of the underlying mythos which helps them objectify
and "get a handle on" their reality.

No one can avoid metaphysics.

Metaphysics is intellectual.

Therefore, no one is non-intellectual.



Bo:


> and IMO the urge to interpret reality coincided with the
> social level which was the result of biological intelligence reaching the
> Homo Sapiens plane where "to be/not be" was realized.


John:

There's a tricky distinction between "realization of being" and "being
through realization".  I'd say the first is intellectual and the second,
social.

And I'd put the social realization at the mammalian level, because lizards
and fish just don't present themselves that way to my observation, and it
makes logical sense that every self is nurtured into existence by other -
mothering.  Without which, we'd probably think more like lizards.




Bo:


> During the
> social era countless interpretations were conceived, from the so-called
> animism over the various mythologies to the most refined one, Semitic
> monotheism, but all were variations over - what to call it - Moral
> maybe.
>
>
John:

See, you're really confused.  "Countless interpretations being conceived" is
a supremely intellectual activity.

Let us define intellect from the handiest dictionary at the moment>

 in·tel·lect
**
**
*a. * The ability to learn and reason; the capacity for knowledge and
understanding.
*b. * The ability to think abstractly or profoundly.



There.  "Abstractly" I dunno profound, but I understand abstract.

In an abstract way... :-)

But the question, unkle, is do you?

This interpretation urge or desire rose to a new level with SOM - to the
> intellectual level in my well known opinion - where all moral
> explanations were deemed superstition and subjective make-believe
> and the detached - objective - scientific approach was introduced.  In
> other words "to order existence" is not "to objectify it". The ordering
> began with the social level, but reached a new and improved stage
> with the intellectual level. Both requires intelligence and that of the IQ
> variations among the Stone Agers was no less than among ourselves.
>
>
> Bodvar
>
>
Well enough to chew on for one quick lunchtime.  I also must cook if I wish
to eat!

But in order to create order, the patterns must first be objectified.  All
objects are only defined patterns in an overall system of order.  Therefore,
ordering and objectifying are, if not synonomous, at least metaphysically
indistinguishable and I'm thinking you'd be well served to come to K class
with me some time for a refresher course or two!

hungry John