[MD] Science - Delusions in Search of Theory

[plattholden at gmail.com]

Hi Mark,
Good questions. I try to answer them below.


On 31 Oct 2010 at 22:13, 118 wrote:

Hi Platt,
>From your post, your interpretation seems to coincide with mine, unless I
read it incorrectly.

Let me ask you the following questions:  Is the intellectual level a
function of individual thought?

Platt
Basically, yes. All thought is individual. But it borrows from many influences 
experienced during an individual's life history.

Mark
Does such individual thought provide the
direction and structure of the intellectual level?  Or, is individual
thought conforming to an intellectual level, in the same way that carbon
atoms (inorganic) conform to make up the biological level.  That is, the
structure of biological molecules must be such that they can be used by the
biological organism.  So, do our thoughts have to fit into the intellectual
level once it is formed so that they become pertinent?

Platt
Individual thought conforms to the intellectual level which consists of thought 
systems including logic, the scientific method, subject-object metaphysics and 
so-called "critical reasoning." For most people in the west, such systems 
comprise the sine qua non of quality thinking. They are taught by the 
educational establishment, not only because they have proved useful in 
understanding the physical realm (where most people's concerns reside) but also 
because it's easy to grade students on their ability to conform to the systems 
and thereby keep them subservient. So, yes, in most instances thought is 
considered "pertinent" when it meets the criteria of the approved thought 
systems that comprise the intellectual level, guarded by a clique of academic 
elites against upstart contrarians.

Of course, you and I know that such systems tend to smother creative 
breakthroughs that lead to new understanding. It is only individuals such as 
Pirsig, Aristotle, Galileo and others like them who, with the insight and 
courage to escape from "approved thinking," make evolutionary progress.  

Thanks for asking for my opinions.  

Platt.


Platt (previously)
> My interpretation of the individual's place in the MOQ hierarchy differs
> from
> yours.
>
> On 31 Oct 2010 at 8:54, 118 wrote:
>
>
>
> I[Mark]
> Free market support points to individual freedom.  For this reason, I
> believe your answer to X's question and the subject matter would be that
> you
> value the individual (or biological level) as having the highest quality.
>  One doesn't have to choose of course, and the question is simply an
> effector itself (let's call it the X factor).  In this interpretation of
> your responses, I would have to agree with you.  The individual is not
> subordinate to society or intellect as MoQ suggests with the hierarchy.
>  This would be similar to the trunk of a plant not being subordinate to the
> forest and flowers on one side, and the roots on the other.  It comprises
> the individual component, and shines from its own merit.
>
> [Platt]
> In the past I have argued that the Intellectual Level should be properly
> renamed the Individual Level  The reason is quite direct: only individuals
> are
> capable of creating intellectual patterns. A new idea is generated by a
> single
> person at a distinct place and time, not by collectives.
>
> Of course, individuals occur at all levels, whether an individual atom
> (inorganic), germ (biological) or nation (social). But, as this site and
> all
> idea interchange demonstrates.intellectual patterns emerge not from groups
> but
> from individual minds. Furthermore, just as no two individuals have the
> exact
> same DNA and no two have the exact same values, no two have the exact same
> ideas. (At the lower levels, differences between individuals are
> indistinct.)
>
> There are other points to make, but enough for now. For me, individual
> freedom
> fosters creation of intellectual patterns as well as the free expression
> thereof. As Pirsig says, individual rights like freedom of speech, of the
> press, of religion, etc., all idea protections, " -- established the
> supremacy
> of the intellectual order over the social order," i.e, individual freedom
> trumps social conformity and reigns at the highest moral level.
>
> Platt.
>