hello everyone
Bodvar writes:
GLOVE
I agree fully with you that only the humans have entered the
intellectual level, but there is something in this passage that I
want to comment
Bodvar, thank you for your reply and your most intelligent comments. i did
not mean to infer that only humans have entered the intellectual level
though. i would prefer to say we perceive the intellect in a way different
from other species. if anything, the intellect has entered us.
Bodvar wrote:
It is the expression aware that bugs me :-). I don't think we differ
at all, it concerns what I wrote to Lithien above.When you say
....aware of them (the bugs) I'd say ....intellectually "aware" of
the abstract idea...... the grazing cow beside your campground
is "aware" at the SENSATION (biological) level, and if a wasp swarm
comes your way you forget all about abstract bugs and - along with
the cow - flee by sheer biological unpleasantness. But normally - in
peace and quiet - we focus in the Intellectual level and call it
"reality" but it's just one fourth of it.
Bodvar, i do not believe the intellect cannot be said to be one-fourth of
reality in any sense, even in a static quality sense, as i see no way of
breaking up reality in that fashion. the intellect may be one of four layers
representing an abstract of reality, but the whole cant be divided into
fourths and then put back together in a proper fashion as far as i can see.
i will agree that part of my perception of the bug is at the intellectual
level, for i have named it bug and enclosed it as bug.
i havent labeled bug good or bad...each have a niche in the environment and
contributes in some fashion to the good of all. the swarm of angry hornets
may indeed produce a low-value situation for the unfortunate victims of
their attack, but the Dynamic directedness of all the individual hornets
attention into a concerted attack as One creates a high-value situation for
the survival of the nest. i would say this social attack is possibly an
intellect level decision on the hornets part against a perceived threat to
the nest. this makes the hornets formidable creatures despite their size and
has allowed them to exist on earth for who knows how many hundreds of
millions of years. can we really ignore this obvious perception of
intellectual level capabilities by insects? there is 'something' going on
that is common to all species, something Dynamic that cant be defined.
Bodvar wrote:
Glove, you know (and hopefully endorse?) my SOTAQI idea: the "danger"
of seeing Q-Intellect as identical to SOM's "mind" (awareness,
consciousness, sentience, "thinking itself"..etc.). Let me show you
my reasoning in this context. "Unconscious" is obviously not what SOM
means by unaware or insentient. All higher organisms can be knocked
unconscious or anaesthesized and this state is clearly different from
their normal "conscious" one. Also, there's sleep. Even fish sleep,
so when they wake up it must be to a reality different from sleep!
SOM has no explanations for these bizarre questions while the MOQ
says that they wake up to the Biological level. To the world of
SENSATION! (To sensation and EMOTION if a socially developed
creature, and to these worlds plus the world of REASON if a human
being.
Bodvar, the analogy of organisms 'waking up' to the biological level
sensation etc. after sleeping is very apt. but it is a static quality
everyday awareness and not Dynamic awareness they are waking up to. it is
reasonable to assume we are in a different reality when we are dreaming, but
i am unsure how correct that assumption is. when awake, normally we are
constantly reassuring ourself that we are indeed awake by running a non-stop
internal discursive dialogue in our heads even though we may not realize
that that is what we are doing. is that really being awake?
if your Subject/Object as The Quality Intellect theory is a language
construct to bridge the gap between the Metaphysics of Quality and
Subject/Object thinking, then i can endorse it. at the same time, i feel
awareness must remain undefinable in any sense as existing in any of the
four static layers. self-awareness or sentience would seem to be an
undefinable 'something' that we each possess but are unable to say exactly
what it is we do possess other than a me-ness.
perhaps thats why i sometimes cring when i see reference to 'higher
organisms', as if all organisms are striving to evolve into humans. this is
one reason for my remarking on insects and the awareness they seem to
possess.
so basically we both have the same concern as seeing the Q-intellect as
awareness. but i think perhaps as much attention should be paid to the
biological level as the inorganic level (quantum) has been here in the Lila
Squad lately. Bodvar, you have alluded to biologist Rupert Sheldrakes
writings in the past, and i think a careful reading of 'A New Science of
Life' will clear up alot of misunderstandings in what i am saying. i have
done a short review on the book which you can find by following the link at
the end of this email if you care to. it really ties into Pirsigs
Metaphysics of Quality quite well.
Bodvar writes:
No monkeywrench at all, but your line...... the intellect is
Quality's way of creating high value situations for all species, from
viruses to human beings......hmmm. I would perhaps have
preferred to say: "Reason is Quality's way of creating value at the
Intellectual level". Otherwise, a great contribution Glove.
Bodvar, thank you for your kind words. i see reason as the way of
perceiving the part of Quality we have formed agreements with...static
quality. reason cannot enclose Dynamic Quality and so it is undefinable.
reason is statically going from A to B because we have enclosed both within
our reality by forming agreements with them. and i think we are both saying
the same thing.
best wishes,
glove
http://members.tripod.com/~Glove_r/Bohr.html
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:36 BST