Re: MD myths and symbols

From: Scott R (jse885@spinn.net)
Date: Wed Jun 18 2003 - 04:41:37 BST

  • Next message: Scott R: "Re: MD The Eudaimonic MoQ"

    All,

    Paul has conveniently gathered some apparently contradictory statements of
    Pirsig on the intellectual level and hence when it emerged. Here's my take.
    First on the oft-quoted quote 24 of LC:

    '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.'

    This would appear to equate the use of language with the intellectual level,
    except for the phrase "that stand for patterns of experience". That can be
    seen to point to the new thing that happened c. 500 BC, namely, people
    started "thinking about" things *in general*, and started the history of
    using language to describe and explain in terms of genera and species, thing
    and attribute, etc.

    But then there is this quote

    "Within this evolutionary relationship it is
    possible to see that intellect has functions that
    predate science and philosophy. The intellect's
    evolutionary purpose has never been to discover an
    ultimate meaning of the universe. That is a relatively
    recent fad. Its historical purpose has been to help a
    society find food, detect danger, and defeat enemies.
    It can do this well or poorly, depending on the
    concepts it invents for the purpose." Lila Ch 24

    However, the Greeks assigned these discoveries to the gods (fire from
    Prometheus, Athena telling Odysseus how to trick the Trojans, etc.). That
    is, until c. 500 BC, intellect was not owned by the individual.

    So, whether or not Pirsig has said as much, I think it is legitimate to say
    that the intellectual level *in humans* is less than 3000 years old. On the
    other hand, I would regard intellect (though perhaps needing a more
    grandiose term, like Logos) to have been "in existence" from the beginning,
    that all static patterns are in some sense "intellectual". If one doesn't
    want to go that far (it is kind of esoteric, to be sure), then one can say
    that it has been "around" all through the social level, but doesn't emerge
    as its own level until the Greeks.

    The implication of this is that it is only with its emergence in humans that
    we can see DQ operating in it, that is, to purposefully work and be creative
    on that level.

    - Scott

    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 : Wed Jun 18 2003 - 05:13:10 BST