Last one i swear, and this one is short,
hey Bo,
you said:
>But let me proceed to the above question. This is probably DMB's
>headache because I agree with you about there can be no language
>without a capability to manipulate symbols, but this again reveals our
>difference: Manipulation of symbols is TO YOU a mental act and
>thereby "intellectual". Isn't that so?
>
>As I tried to convey in my "intelligence" speech of the previous
>message, if one takes that path (intelligence=intellect) q-intellect -
> >even seen as a "tool" - starts by the senses because sense inputs are
>"symbolic" (representating something else). The sight of a tree is
>something that has been transformed by the receptors in the eyes into
>nerve pulses that are interpreted by the brain into a "tree". This is the
>SOM impasse that the empiricist philosophers (Berkeley mainly)
>discovered, I won't harp on it.
Elliot:
Tricky ground, but i have pondered this much but not so much in MoQ terms.
First, light becoming nerve impulses is not symbolic. thats biological and
not social or intellectual. Second, you say the brain interprets the
impulses to be a tree. The brain does it? so "tree" is also a biological
function? I believe you mean mind, not brain. then we get into what
Daoists, buddhists and Don Juan have been saying: this world is an illusion,
only a description. This is fundemental to mysticism and id really like to
see exactly where it fits into the MoQ if at all. What we percieve to be
"tree" is actually a symbol, agree, which is socially mediated. So its a
social pattern. i think the intellect began when we developed a different
type of symbol for tree, perhaps the language derived symbol (no, thats not
right), this is a different level of symbol perhaps because it can be
manipulated. replace "tree" with "bone" and im envisioning the opening
scene of 2001. What do you think happened there? use of tools is ______
level behavior. this as the ameba of the intellect, not yet ready for
sexual reproduction (manipulation of language) or multi cellular organisms
(complex thoughts).
Think about this in MoQ terms i will. please respond so that this thread
doesnt get lost, cause i really will forget in the pursuit of other platipi.
Elliot
I think i dissagree with Pirsigs definition of enlightenment, the death of
intellectual patterns while social and biological are kept. If "tree" is a
social construct, and the enlightened get beneath that then...
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
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 - 16:02:18 BST