[MD] Pirsig's theory of truth

[skutvik at online.no]

Good Man John. 

11 May thou spaketh 

> 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.

Why "intellectual" when it clearly is intelligence coupled with curiosity 
and awe, but I see that you have a hard time understanding the Q-
levels, namely the control of the parent level.. Thus gods, mythological 
or mono-theist are all about creating bulwarks against the biological 
"barbarians at the gates".  A bit tongue-in-cheekish but a stone age 
tribe had not the means of creating a police force, consequently had to 
refer to the wrath of the gods if the members didn't toe the line.    

> 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. 

I have problems understanding  what you object to: the MOQ or my 
interpretation I didn't  think you preferred DMB's yet  about "intellect 
=symbolic language" is playing straight into his hand. The Q-
intellectual level occurred when people realized that "language is 
symbols in contrast to the what it symbolizes" and moreover "that 
thoughts are subjective turning of mental wheels in contrast to the real 
world out there"  ... this and a million similar subject/object contrasts 
comprise the VALUE of the intellectual level. .  

I must make it short, I'm hampered by having to think and have other 
chores ... fully tongue in cheek, a great painting career is going down 
the drain due to this.

Bodvar 

PS
I saw in this morning's mail that you sided with DMB, I'm not much 
worried by that, your (embarrassing) understanding of the  MOQ  
automatically places you over there.    














> 
> 
> 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
> 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
> 
>