Hey Erin,
Sorry I've been so scarce around here lately, but I've been busy, busy,
busy.
ERIN
A question:
>
> PIRSIG:" 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."
>
> I wasn't sure if I was reading this right but for a social pattern to
become a
> social level does it involve awareness of the next higher level.
> So does that mean we can not have an intellectual level without awareness
of a
> higher level? Is that evidence there is a 5th level?
RICK
Tough questions. It is interesting that Pirsig included Primates as
primitive social bearers b/c it indicates that other species have achieved
at least lower forms of social patterning (I guess he thinks that Primate
'social' behavior isn't genetically 'hard-wired').
By "unaware of the next higher level" I thought he was postulating a
society w/o intellect. A vision of a society w/o intellect which includes
"social learning that is not genetically hard-wired but yet is not symbolic"
was hard for me to get my mind around. But I started to wonder why he used
the phrase "unaware of the next higher level" rather than simply "without a
next higher level" and it brought to mind this quote...
PIRSIG
..[I]ntellect has functions that predate science and philosophy. The
intellect's evolutionary purpose has never been to discover an ultimate
meaning of the universe. That is a relatively recent fad. Its historical
purpose has been to help a society find food, detect danger, and defeat
enemies (LILA 344).
RICK
Finding food and detecting danger are about as primitive as social
functions come. And in this quote, Pirsig characterizes these functions as
primitive intellectual patterns rather than social patterns. So I'm
starting to think that all societies have some form of an Intellectual level
whether they are aware of it or not. So that brings me back to your
question, " ...for a social pattern to become a social level does it
involve awareness of the next higher level [?]"
I think it's a matter of latching. For social patterns to become a
social level, enough social patterns have to latch long enough for its
members to be afforded the freedom to "become aware" of the intellectual
patterns they already bear. Once latched in, they can then begin to develop
more advanced intellectual patterns (like science and philosophy). Which
would make the answer to your second question, "So does that mean we can not
have an intellectual level without awareness of a higher level?"... maybe.
If primitive societies bear intellectual patterns without being aware of
it, then it seems entirely possible a primitive intellectual level could
bear the seeds of higher level without being aware of it. However, given
that Pirsig seems to place the dawn of the Intellectual level somewhere
around Aristotle's time (after thousands or hundreds of thousands of years
of social evolution) I would guess that Intellect is still too young to have
latched sufficiently enough to become aware of the higher patterns (if they
exist). Moreover, if there was a level higher than intellect it would be so
high up the chain that it's difficult to imagine that we would perceive it
anymore than a rock perceives societies, or a wild animal perceives science.
just a thought
rick
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