[MD] Is this the inadequacy of the MOQ?

[rapsncows at fastmail.fm]

Tim's reply within:

> [Mark adds]
> There is such a thing as pointing out defects in a rational argument
> using
> hyperbole, or arguing through extremes.

Just a side point, Fyodor Dostoyevsky wrote a whole novel about this
concept of an 'intelligent murder'.  That book is "crime and punishment'
if anyone cares.

  What this means is one chooses
> an
> extreme example which would result from a premise to show that the
> premise
> is flawed.  Such reasoning does not necessarily add to the argument
> against,
> but is more of a red herring (do you know that term?  I used to eat
> herring
> in Holland).  Such examples used to test the limits or to prove a point,
> and
> are often misleading and purposefully distorting.  Lawyers love them, as
> do
> politicians.  So I would agree with dmb that the point is to remain
> reasonable.
> 
> What you say, Tim, regarding intellect may indeed be true, but it adds
> nothing.  The scale of intelligence is certainly something we have
> discussed.  We have the IQ test that has been considered somewhat
> self-serving by some.  Such a test is the intellectual age divided by
> actual
> age, multiplied by 100.  In this way, 100 is average.  The intellectual
> age
> is ill defined. 

But the questions that are used to determine it presume that there is
some concept: TRUTH.  Truth then is teh judge of intelligence.

> The measurements rely on certain types of problem
> solving,

again, are you telling me that intellect means the ability to grasp
reality through problems-solutions?  There is such a real thing as a
problem, and such a real thing as a right solution?

> perhaps because the founders were good problem solvers.   In my opinion,
> they mean nothing since effort and drive are more important, and their
> use
> in education is overblown.
> 
> Rather than define intelligence, it may be more relevant to consider how
> it
> is used.  Use your common sense to define intelligence.  What is better
> to
> you?  How would you use your intelligence to achieve that?  Where does
> wisdom come in?

Yes, as a subject/object, as a "me", there may be certain problems which
solutions I can never know, and must rely on common sense...  But I
guess what I am really asking: does quality itself have a hard
definition for intelligence?  Or a hard definition for Moral, for that
matter?  I think Phaerus's point was that, regarding the former, yes, it
is quality, and not the intermediate subjects-and-objects, which
supplies the definition for intelligence; and then regarding the latter:
yes.

Tim
-- 
  
  rapsncows at fastmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service.