From: Sam Norton (elizaphanian@kohath.wanadoo.co.uk)
Date: Mon Sep 12 2005 - 11:59:52 BST
Hey Bo,
I have a dozen e-mails on MD in my in-tray awaiting an answer - including three
from Wim, who has saintly patience - and yours is one of them. I'm sorry that
real life pressures prevent me from engaging with the list as much as I would
like, but I'm not deliberately avoiding you, I promise. I'll get to it as soon
as I can. For what it's worth I agree with your final sentiment.
Sam
http://elizaphanian.blogspot.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: <skutvik@online.no>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 10:02 AM
Subject: MD Sam's SOM
> Sam
>
> I really waited for your reply to the below portion of my message
> of 6 Sep. but you obviously went on to the more important matter
> of hurricanes and such. It was the final part that I see containing
> some important points and these I reproduce in this message
>
> Bo
>
> .....................................................
> Sam:
>> I see SOM as linked to the intellectual in the same way that a field
>> of corn is linked to the social. It's produced by the social, it's
>> governed by the social, but in itself it's a biological pattern. As
>> I see all language as necessarily social (and SOM is language)
>
> Bo:
> Interesting. That language is a social pattern I agree with, and
> also that intellect latched on to language to escape society, but
> SOM as social because it "is language" ...see below.
>
>> I think
>> it's social, to that degree. Put differently, that which is 'above'
>> SOM is (an) intellect, not 'intellect as such' - where I agree with
>> you that it is simply a reification of classic SOM understandings of
>> 'mind'.
>
> You see SOM as social because it is (expressed by) language.
> Look, DQ used carbon to escape the inorganic level and the first
> non-inorganic pattern had necessarily to be biological. Likewise
> when DQ hijacked language to escape society, the first non-
> social pattern must be intellectual. At the base of all intellectual
> patterns we find language, in the same way that all organisms are
> carbon-based.
>
> Yours seems to be a variant of Paul Turner's view on biology. He
> sees DNA as inorganic yet serving life's purpose, while you see
> SOM as social yet serving intellect's purpose? I protest this view
> of something straddling two levels. Carbon (plus some other) is
> the only thing left when an organism dies. DNA decomposes
> along with the rest. Language is the social pattern left if intellect
> dies. SOM "decomposes" too.
>
> .....unless you see SOM as "me here you there" but I hope you
> agree that SOM is the subject/object METAPHYSICS as
> described in ZMM?
>
> We must talk more often Sam.
>
> Bo
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
>
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 : Mon Sep 12 2005 - 12:14:15 BST