[MD] Anti-intellectualism revisited

[John Carl]

Not at all, Ron.


On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Ron Kulp <xacto at rocketmail.com> wrote:

> John,
> Ok, you feel creativity stands above excellence. But I ask, how is
> creativity set apart from problem solving? Isn't necessity the mother if
> invention?
> - Ron
>
>
I feel that creativity stands side-by-side with excellence.  It's a
marriage, not a hierarchy.

John




> > On Jun 9, 2014, at 1:15 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Ron,
> >
> >
> > Ron:
> >
> >> I think the main problem is the beginning assumptions about what
> >> The term "intellect " means, to you.
> >
> > Jc: I'm sure that's true.  Just about any philosophic problem hangs on
> our
> > assumptions.
> >
> > Ron:
> >
> >
> >> Several definitions mention it as a faculty of the mind, a function of
> >> consciousness, the act of critical
> >> Thinking.
> >
> >
> > jc:  The act of critical thinking comes closest to my view.  Everybody
> has
> > a mind, but not everybody uses their intellect.
> >
> > Ron;
> >
> >
> >> But you by-pass those entries and hold to what interests you.
> >
> >
> >
> > Jc:  What interests me Ron, is that "the act of critical thinking" is
> only
> > half the story.  Why then does the MoQ make it seem like the whole
> > enchilada?
> >
> > Ron:
> >
> >
> >> That traditional misunderstanding, which is what it is,
> >> A traditional misunderstanding of the meaning of "intellect" handed down
> >> by the Greeks. That misunderstanding is objectivism. Robert Pirsigs
> project
> >> Is to correct this misunderstanding.
> >> That's why it's important to read Plato and Aristotle and understand
> >> The origin of the Greek meaning and tradition of intellect. The project
> is
> >> about the recovery of a tradition of thought before misinterpretation
> >> divided it. "Art is born when out of the many bits if information
> derived
> >> from experience there emerges a grasp of those similarities in view of
> >> which they are unified whole."
> >> Aristotle metaphysics book alpha.
> >>
> >> "Knowing in the truest sense concerns
> >> What is best in the truest sense. So intellect finds it's fulfillment in
> >> being aware of the intelligible. "
> >>
> >> "It is this better state that the divine has being and life, the self
> >> sufficient activity of the divine is life at its eternal best."
> >> - book Lambda
> >>
> >> To the Greeks knowing what is best
> >> Is the divine aspect of being.
> >
> >
> >
> >>>
> >>> JohnC
> >>>
> >>> PS:  By "respond" I mean without resorting to "because RMP said so".
> >>> Since's it's Pirsig's terminology I'm taking to task here, something
> more
> >>> is needed to defend it than the mere fact of what Pirsig said.
> >> Ron:
> >> How else are we to tie into what we mean. This is a site dedicated to
> his
> >> work.
> >
> >
> > What I mean is, since I'm addressing a shortcoming in Pirsig's view, it's
> > nonsensical to respond with "but that's Pirsig's view".  or "you don't
> > understand the MoQ"
> >
> > Look at the story - Phaedrus licked the daemon of objective intellect,
> > right?  And this thing, that he hated, was in himself as well, right?
>  That
> > which endlessly analyzes and examines critically.  Then in Lila, he falls
> > back into, what he terms himself, "degenerate activity". (Matt 12:43-45)
> >
> > But the immorality was not doing metaphysics, the immorality was
> > enthroning intellect as the king of all static being.  The reason I say
> > immoral is, because intellect was also doing the crowning.  A king cannot
> > crown himself.  There must be otherness, at the top level to avoid
> > recursion.
> >
> > Also immoral, because making the MoQ thus, allows intellect to bully and
> > rule over all other patterns, putting itself first and reifying itself,
> it
> > then kills all opposition and alternative thinking.  It's too static.  DQ
> > has been placed in the unobtainable ether where its inaccessible and we
> > don't talk about it anymore.  My solution is to bring it down to earth,
> and
> > make artistic imagination the partner of intellect at the 4th level and
> not
> > only is that satisfying (there's no place for ART in the MoQ!!)  it's a
> > logical solution because without imaginative conceptualization, there is
> > nothing to critically analyze.  Intellect is good at selecting among
> given
> > ideas - but then where do given ideas come from?  Not intellect, or
> > Phaedrus would have deduced how hypothesi arose.
> >
> > Thanks for hearing me out, Ron.
> >
> > 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
> 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
>



-- 
"finite players
play within boundaries.
Infinite players
play *with* boundaries."