From: Valence (valence10@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Nov 26 2002 - 04:42:55 GMT
Hey Platt, David and Maggie,
Thanks for the input everyone. I wrote a response to David and Maggie's
posts and have sent it out twice but it hasn't shown up on the list or been
bounced back to me yet. I've included some edited parts of those responses
again at the bottom of this post following my reply to Platt.
> > PIRSIG 1
> > For purposes of MOQ precision, let's say the intellectual level is the
> > same as mind. It is the collection and manipulation of symbols, created
in
> > the brain, that stand for patterns of experience.
> >
> > PIRSIG 2
> > In the MOQ all organisms are objective. The exist in the material
> > world. All societies are subjective. They exist in the mental world.
> > Again the distinction is very sharp.
> >
> > RICK (from last time)
> > Quote #1 clearly states that "the intellectual level is the same as
> > mind". Yet, quote #2 states that "All societies... exist in the mental
> > world." Unless there is some meaningful difference between "mind" and
"the
> > mental world" then these two quotes taken together would add up to
saying
> > that all societies exist in the intellectual level. Yet, that obviously
> > can't be right given the very design of the static levels. The most
> > frustrating part of this is that in both of the quotes Pirsig claims he
is
> > acting in the interest of precision (a sharp distinction).
> > Anybody care to try and reconcile these quotes?
PLATT
> Certainly you have a point. For me the solution is to equate mind with
> intellect, both of which have been around since the first human, but not
> equate mind with the intellectual 'level' which didn't come into its own
> until the ancient Greek civilization and didn't become dominant until
> after World War I. If you regard intellect (mind) and intellectual level
as
> having two distinct meanings (though of course related) it helps to
> resolve the problem you raise.
RICK
I can live with that. It reconciles the quotes and it feels Pirsigian,
even if it may not quite be what Pirsig meant (after all, he did say "the
intellectual LEVEL" in the first quote). However, it doesn't do much for
Pirsig's claims in the quotes to increased precision. The word "intellect"
floats around so much in Pirsig's work ('intellect', 'intellectual level',
'pre-intellectual awareness','intellectually nowhere',etc). Perhaps it
would be clearer if the term "Intellect" were reserved for the name of the
highest level and the "individual human intellect" which you differentiate
from the actual level should be called something like "thought" or "mind".
PLATT
Another way to resolve it is to think of
> mind (intellect) as an individual attribute of each human whereas the
> intellectual level represents the collective attribute of human knowledge
> in general. This may be what Pirsig had in mind :-) in defining the
> intellectual level in quote 1 above.
RICK
Everyone's got a mind, but no man is an intellectual level? Sounds alright
to me.
-------------------------------------------------------------
DMB
I think you ought to check your math, because the two quotes do not add up
to what you say they do. The mistake comes in assuming that only one or the
other can be in the mind, but Pirsig says that both are mental, both are
subjective, both are part of the mind.
RICK
First, I think my math is just fine. He says the intellectual level is
the same as mind. Then he said ALL societies exist in the mental world.
Now unless, "mind" is different then "the mental world" then that quite
clearly adds up to "all societies exist in the intellect".
Second, I'm not sure what you're responding to when you say, "The
mistake comes in assuming that only one or the other can be in the mind..."
I made no such assumption in my post (or any assumptions for that matter).
It is Pirsig who seems to claim that intellect is synonymous with mind.
Finally, while Pirsig does imply that both levels are "mental" and
"subjective" in the second quote, the first quote very clearly states, "the
intellectual level is THE SAME AS mind (emphasis added)." He does NOT say,
as you claim, that intellect is "A PART OF mind". He says it's "the same
as". There's nothing wrong with reconciling the two quotes by saying that
Pirsig misspoke in the first one, but you should at least admit you are
rewriting his words. He most definitely did not write "a part of".
DMB
This is no problem. There is a huge difference between rocks and organisms.
They are at two different levels of evolution, yet they are both objective
and physical. No problem. Same with the social and intellectual level. There
are very important differences, but they are both in the mind. The way
you've added up these quotes is like saying that all rocks exist at the
biological level, which makes the fallacy quite clear, no?
RICK
But once again David, you've ignored Pirsig's own words when he says
"Intellect is THE SAME AS mind." You say "they are both in the mind." But
one of you must be wrong or else it would be like saying "the intellectual
level and the sociological level are both a part of the intellectual level".
To use your analogy, it would be like saying "the biological level and the
inorganic level are both a part of the biological level"... which makes the
problem quite clear, yes?
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MAGGIE
I think pirsig did know what he was talking about, and it's not a mistake.
Human societies have been forever changed by intellect. Once the
intellectual patterns came into static existence, they created new SOCIAL
patterns, so many and so vast that we can barely find examples of the
once-pristine, unmodified social patterns in human society.
RICK
Is this to say that all societies now exist on the intellectual level?
Wouldn't this reduce the MoQ to 3 levels? And wouldn't this conclusion
completely BLUR the distinction between the social and intellectual levels,
directly in contrast to Pirsig's claims of increased precision? While I'm
sure you're right that the intellectual level has forever changed society,
I'm not sure that's what Pirsig was getting at in this particular quote.
thanks all,
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 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 26 2002 - 04:42:49 GMT