[MD] Anti-intellectualism revisited

[Ron Kulp]

John,
Again, isn't creativity a problem solving endeavor?
-Ron 

> On Jun 10, 2014, at 12:07 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 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."
> 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