[MD] Moq_Discuss Digest, Vol 62, Issue 93

[118]

Hi JA,

Yes, perhaps we have a different understanding of the intellectual
level, as opposed to intellectualizing.  But, I have yet to read
Chapter 21 again.

Each level is defined by a transition into a new purpose, in my opinion.

1) inorganic level, purpose is to be the inorganic level (yes, a cop
out, but I have not idea what the purpose of the inorganic level is)
2) Organic level, purpose is to create self reproducing life
3) Social level, purpose is to provide species with numerous participants
4) Intellectual level, purpose is to guide humanity.

As a level, the intellectual level is not just intellectualizing, that
happens at the organic level.  It is the movement of such
intellectualizations.  As individuals in the organic level, we have no
control over those movements, they have a consciousness of their own,
which we can never fathom.  (If we could control them, we wouldn't
have been stuck in the dark ages for so long, or believed everything
Aristotle said.)  This would be similar to a cell of our bodies having
no idea what our human consciousness is.  It would appear that the
intellectual level is guided by morality, not by individual's morals.
I have stated before that each level cannot control other levels.  We
cannot control how atoms are arranged anymore than they can control
how we think.  We can use such arrangement to build things we like,
but there is no control over the inorganic level.  Horse and I
discussed this for a while, and then dropped it.  So I do not take
much to this whole control thing.  We can control things within our
own level, perhaps.  It depends what the word control is controlling.

But, I will read chapter 21 again to see if it is convincing.

Mark

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Jan-Anders <jananderses at telia.com> wrote:
> Mark
>
> It seems then that we have a different understanding of the intellectual
> level where the intellectual patterns prosper.
>
> 1 inorganic level with patterns like atoms and molecules
> 2 organic level with patterns like cells, bacterias and mud sharks
> 3 social level with walrus herds on the beach, human tribes and victorians.
> 4 intellectual level with ideas and isms like Zenbuddhism and Chicago
> Monetarians
>
> People make their choice out from different level of Moral.
> The chemistry professor choose a formula out from its chemical function
> regardless how harmful it will be to mankind.
> Bacterias don't separate demovrats from republicans.
> Any tribe can hold different ideas about fashion and proper language
> Intellectual conflicts can split families and churches into pieces.
>
> The main question is where the commanding moral for any decison is based. Is
> it in the interest of the atomic structure, in favour of the biological
> structure or for social reasons? Or is it just because I think it is d-d
> right to make that decision? This rightness is a intellectual static
> pattern. Another intellectual concept is spelled M-O-N-E-Y superior to any
> social structure.
>
> That is how I read Lila ch 21-
>
> best
>
> Jan-Anders
>

> 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
>