Hi 3WD,
I just got Lila's child yesterday and see what you are saying more clearly
now.
But In annotation # 44 Pirsig says
" A social pattern which would be unaware of the next higher level would be
found among prehistoric people and the higher PRIMATES (emphasis mine) when
they exhibit social learning that is not genetically hard-wired but yet is not
symbolic."
So for a social pattern to become a social level it has to involve symbol
usage.
I don't think he is saying it CAN only be humans but that humans are the only
"uncontroversial" symbol users. I know there is some animal cognitive
literature about animals ability of this but it is still controversial I
think.
I think some of the controversy is that whether what they learn is through
simple reinforcement and punishment or a more abstract manipulation. In
language learning there are primates that demonstrate this ability but again
they don't learn the flexibilty of grammar. With primates George eat orange.
Orange eat george are used interchangably. Dolphins show some flexiblity and
spontanteity in language learning that I think would be considered symbol
usage but it is still fuzzy.
The rigid communication of other animals are probably considered hard-wired by
Pirsig.
My guess is that the ability to use a grammer or use symbols flexibly is what
makes up the social level. The only controversial animals in my mind are
dolphins and primates.
Erin
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:15 BST