[MD] Levels of intelligence, a brief scientific excursion

[118]

Hi All,

There has been discussion concerning the pre-intellectual experience, and I
reread the essay which Matt Kundert provides on his website concerning the
separation of DQ and SQ (
http://pirsigaffliction.blogspot.com/2006/04/dynamic-quality-as-pre-intellectual.html),
which was recently referred to in MOQ discuss.  Matt does his best to
outline the problem, and I found the essay instructive.

As a scientist and a former neurochemist, I have always been fascinated by
our ability to create intricate pictures of what we see or sense and the
ability to self-reflect.  MOQ provides the analogy of the level of Intellect
as a distinct stratum expressed by Quality, as intuited by our
sensibilities.  Needing more information on ways to describe this
phenomenon, I read some scientific papers on how such intellect was
currently being described by neurophysiologist, psychologist, artificial
intelligence researchers, and behavioral robotics studies.

Let me first say, that an understanding of MOQ does not require any level of
input from a field of science.  Such things are simply descriptions to
provide common agreement in the growth of knowledge.  Such agreement may
have impact in medical fields and is therefore not trivial.  But for a
metaphysics a scientific approach can be considered as a way of creating a
reality which we can subscribe to.  It is not my purpose to define what
intelligence is since a bacteria, a river, or even the world can be
considered intelligent as they adapt to the environment on a continual
basis.  I simply want to present one view of such a thing through the study
of neural networks.

I found a good description of the state of the art of neurophysiology in a
book on prerational intelligence, something coined recently in the area of
behavioral robotics.  The chapter can be found at the following link:
http://jacquespaillard.apinc.org/pdf/274-prerational-intelligence-00.pdf.
 It is a pain to read, and unless you are so inclined, do not bother.  Using
the approach of evolutionary neurophysiology, the chapter describes the
etiology of intelligence in a format of neural networks where there are
layers of development which control the layers below.  In the paradigm of
evolution, the intent is of course survival, which is enhanced through an
increase in plasticity or decision making ability.  Using this model, there
were 6 levels of development which can also be described in the human
nervous system, from primitive to intelligent structures (pages 121 and 122
of reference).  Of course the levels are for the purposes of illustration
only, and cannot be structurally isolated.

Level A: Paleokinetic Regulations - likened to spinal chord reflexes and
basic defensive mechanisms, like jumping up from a hot stove.

Level B: Synergies - described by the brain stem as providing overall
movement capabilities and proprioception, that is, brings the body together
as a unit.

Level C: Spatial Field -  This involves the cortex and makes goal-directed
motions in the near environment possible (swatting a fly).

Level D: Object Actions - This can be described by added layers of the
neocortex which are procedural regulators and permit detailed perception and
object manipulations.  This is sustained by procedural memory where the
experience is simply literal.  I would liken this to riding a bike.

Level E: Conceptual Structures - Provides generic class recognition,
language, and culture.  This also affords symbolic representations of the
world; this is also described as common consciousness.

Level F: Metacognitive Coordinations - This is where ontological parameters
of knowledge comes in, a personal view of the world, reflective
consciousness and imagination.  In other words, Philosophy, and such a thing
is said to occur in the prefrontal cortex.

It would appear from what I have read of MOQ, that we could perhaps
relegated the pre-conceptual to levels A through D.  Levels E and F
coordinate to provide us with the conceptual.  The chapter referenced also
briefly connects physiology with how these functions are expressed during
early childhood in a stage-like fashion as ontogenesis, where levels E and F
are reached by the age of four.  So the notion of becoming a baby once
again, as presented by Matt (and Pirsig), has support here.  There may also
be some correlation between the social and intellectual levels, as described
by MOQ, here.

Now that everybody is quite bored with this or given up, I will end this
here.  This brief excursion into the field of science is not meant to
provide support to or dismiss the notion of dynamic or static Quality, but
may be of interest to some.  The metaphysical interpretations of these
things do not require the intrusion of science for support.  Suffice it to
say, that if we do go into scientific support for MOQ, it becomes quite
complicated and perhaps not productive.  Science is yet another
interpretation of reality, nothing more, nothing less.

Cheers,
Mark