-----Original Message-----
From: elliot hallmark [mailto:onoffononoffon@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 1:39 PM
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Subject: RE: MD a Quality event
Elliot said:
Sorry for the second email on the same subject:
DMB says:
Quite alright. This second message gets to the point much faster. I'm
skipping Jaron's comments to make it even quicker. About that just one word;
disagree.
Elliot wrote:
you say that symbolic communication, as part of the social level, came
before the intellect. Pirsig defines the intel level in his 43rd annotation
as "the manipulation of language derived symbols for experience". If the
intel level is the manipulation of symbols, how did symbols evolve before
intellect? whats the purpose of symbols before they can be manipulated?
what is symbolic communication if it isnt the manipulation of symbols?
Jaron's insight points out that it requires the capacity to manipulate
symbols and the need for symbols to manipulate to develope words. The idea
of your social level, where there are symbols but no means to manipulate
them and therefore no unique sentances and therefore no symbolic
communication but yet, there are symbols without purpose, well forgive me
for thinking this sounds meaningless for a comprehensive metaphysics.
perhaps this isnt what you were suggesting.
DMB says:
The Pirsig quote is helpful. Wish we had the context. Anyway, it seems to
answer your question. He is making a distinction between language itself and
"language-derived symbols" such as symbolic logic and metaphysics. This
reminds me of his Cartesian correction. Pirsig says that for Descartes to
have been correct he should have said, "The French culture exists, therefore
I think, therefore I am." Here Pirsig is saying that culture, and that
includes language, is what makes his philosophizing possible. His thinking
these philosophical thoughts depend on language and is essentially "the
manipulation of "language-derived symbols". And Descartes is not just
thinking, he's thinking ABOUT thinking. This is the intellectual level's
advantage over the social level. This is a recently developed ability,
whereas people have been thinkning and talking for tens of thousands of
years.
Elliot said:
But you point to caveman drawings as examples of symbols before intellect...
Did you see 2001? i think the opening scene is a good depiction of the
birth of the intelectual level. the use of tools and problem solving
intelligence require the manipulation of symbols in the mind. how does a
caveman draw without being able to manipulate the idea of "piece of chalk"
in his mind and translate that to the calculated movements of his hand? How
could he have an idea of chalk and not beable to manipulate it? symbols and
their manipulation nessicarily arose at the same time, as one is meaningless
without the other.
DMB says:
There's no denying it. There was a great intelligence in the social level.
It created language, art, civilization and religion. And even the spoken
language is an exercise in the manipulation of words and pictures, which are
symbols. But the manipulation of language-derived symbols is a step above
that. Are you more confused than ever or did that help?
Thanks. You can have your eyes back now. DMB
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 - 16:02:16 BST