From: Paul Turner (pauljturner@yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Mon Jun 09 2003 - 10:46:33 BST
Hi David
> dmb says:
> Even institutions founded on and dedicated to
> intellectual values are static
> social values? I don't understand people who are
> unpersuaded by logic.
You mean you don't understand people who are
unpersuaded by you. You aren't doing anything with
logic, you're just disagreeing. There's nothing wrong
with that but don't claim logical high ground, or if
you are going to, prove it.
dmb says: Sigh.
Do you know how patronising that is?
> Paul, dude, your interpretation is illogical to the
> max. If an organization
> is all about intellectual values how can we rightly
> call it social?
I've already explained that. See below for supporting
Pirsig quotes.
Makes no
> sense. Well, since demonstrating the illogic of your
> postion seems to have
> no effect, how about authority instead. Straight
> from the horse's mouth....
Saying that my position is illogical is not
demonstrating it. All you have demonstrated is that
you disagree with my definition of the levels.
> From chapter 13 of LILA:
> "Third, there were moral codes that established
> intellectual order over the
> social order - democracy, trial by jury, freedom of
> speech, freedom of the
> press."
>
> dmb continues:
> Everyone of the examples sited here by Pirsig
> involves a social institution
> of some kind for it perperuation.
Yes, they are all principles which establish the
dominance of intellectual patterns of value over
social patterns of value.
The institutions do not become intellectual patterns
of value.
PIRSIG: 'The social patterns in the next box down
include institutions such as family, church and
government.' SODV
'Intellectual patterns of truth and freedom often
oppose social patterns of government." SODV
Clearly, it is not
> group activity or
> collective purpose that defines the social level.
No, but they are part of the definition.
PIRSIG on social patterns of value:
'..a group of human beings broadly distinguished from
other groups by mutual interests, participation in
characteristic relationships, shared institutions, and
a common culture' Lila's Child
'I think it is better to keep it as subjective customs
of groups of people' Lila's Child
'However, I think the MOQ will be better if the
divisions between the levels are sharp rather than
fuzzy. An analogy could be made to the law, which is a
set of intellectual rules for social quality.' Lila's
Child
PIRSIG on intellectual patterns of value
'For purposes of MOQ precision, let's say that 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.' Lila's
Child
'"Kenntnis" would be the more primitive recognition of
a repetitive pattern, such as a baby first recognizing
its mother's face...an immediate
Dynamic-to-intellectual process. As the baby grows up
its static intellectual patterns grow more complex and
dominating...' Lila's Child
'...actually "common sense" which is a set of ideas,
has to come first. This "common sense" is arrived at
through a web of socially approved evaluations of
various alternatives." Lila's Child
'In the MOQ, laws are a species of intellectual
patterns that are associated with a lot of social
authority and are slow to change.' Lila's Child
'My statement that "Both the genius and the mentally
retarded person are at the social level" is intended
to refute the statement that "the genius appears to be
on a higher evolutionary level." A person who holds an
idea is a social entity, no matter what ideas he
holds. The ideas he holds are an intellectual entity,
no matter who holds them.' Lila's Child
'Intellect is simply thinking' Lila's Child
If
> that were true Pirsig
> wouldn't be able to site democracy or federal laws
> as examples of
> intellectual values.
Democracy and federal laws are a set of intellectual
rules for social quality.
See? In fact, a large part of
> what Pirsig does in
> talking about politics and war is to point out the
> we're in a transition
> period where intellectual values are supposed to
> take control of SOCEITY.
Yes. But societies don't become intellectual patterns
of value in the process.
>
> From chapter 22 of LILA:
> "In the US the economic and social upheaval was not
> so great as in Europe,
> but FDR and the NEW DEAL, nevertheless, became the
> center of a lesser storm
> between social and intellectual forces. The New Deal
> was many things, but at
> the center of it all was the belief that
> intellectual planing by the
> government was necessary for society to regain its
> health."
Ok, how would you classify these?:
- Democracy
- The British government
- A fascist government
- science
- scientists
- The President of the U.S.
- University
- Physics
- A physics professor
- Law
- Law Courts
I've provided a definition of the social and
intellectual levels and given lots of examples. What
are your definitions, David?
cheers
Paul
__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience
http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/yplus/yoffer.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 Jun 09 2003 - 10:47:30 BST