From: Michael Hamilton (thethemichael@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Sep 29 2005 - 15:50:15 BST
Hi Bo (Scott and Rebecca mentioned),
I just want to home in on one particular thing you said in reply to
Rebecca, because I think you're contradicting yourself.
Rebecca wrote:
> > The concept of 'Nothingness' is an intellectual
> > static pattern. You have to get to it by a bit of a symbolically circular
> > argument though. Nothing doesn't actually exsit.
Bo replied:
> ...which may be interesting enough. I will just say: What is not
> "intellectual" if things expressed by language are intellectual?
I'm totally in agreement with your reasoning so far... (Just as an
aside, I suspect that this wider definition of intellect that you are
objecting to, i.e. the use and manipulation of language, is roughly
Barfield's usage of the term "intellect", and a possible cause of
Scott's objections to how "intellect" is used in the MOQ. I'm hoping
that simply referring to the MOQ's fourth level as just "the fourth
level", might help a little.)
> In
> that case everything is [intellectual], and is why I so vehemently resist that the
> intellectual level of the MOQ has anything to do with thinking or
> language or mental activity.
But don't you see that if _everything_ is expressed in language (as
you implied in the first part of your argument), intellect must be a
part of that everything? Therefore, intellect must have _something_ to
do with language, thinking, and mental activity. The subject/object
divide is the normal mode of experience in the West precisely because
it is embedded in the language people use and in the way people think.
What I _hope_ you are resisting is the idea that _everything_ to do
with language, thinking and mental activity should be part of the
MOQ's fourth level. I'm pretty sure that's what you actually mean, as
you've said many times that language is the fourth level's "carbon" (I
seem to remember Matt calling language the "currency" of the fourth
level, by which I suppose he meant the same thing). So I can't believe
that you really think language has nothing to do with the fourth
level, but that's certainly the impression I get from the bit quoted
above.
I'm just saying this in the hope of avoiding confusion, and to make
sure that you're arguing what I think you're arguing.
Regards,
Mike
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 : Thu Sep 29 2005 - 17:36:27 BST