From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun Jul 13 2003 - 23:31:28 BST
Howdy MOQers:
Khoo Hock Aun said:
"Having arrived at the height of intellect how do we deconstruct it?
More intellect doesn't seem to be the answer."
Scott replied:
My answer is not "more" intellect, but "better" intellect, since I am of
the opinion that we have not arrived at the height of intellect. ...
I see spiritual practice as a means of strengthening the intellect.
dmb says:
Right. I think you both make good points and they aren't really
contradictory. Intellectual models can be a trap. Any sort of static quality
can suck you in and especially the conventional patterns. Normal, everyday
ego consciousness, which is mostly made up of fears and desires, is the trap
in which most everybody is caught. And this, I think, is what the mystics
have always been referring to in their quest to shatter our illusions. I
think this illusion is cultural, both social and intellectual levels are
part of this illusion. Not that we can throw them in the garbage or
otherwise abandon them. We just learn to see through them, learn to see what
they're all about without being enthralled. (Pay no attention to that man
behind the curtain!) I think this is what Scott is getting at. As I
understand it, at least some forms of meditation involve various mental
practices and disciplines that are aimed variously at examination of one's
own mind, awareness of one's body and surroundings, making the mind quiet,
focused or relaxed. Its not like doing physics or philsophy. Its not
intellectual in that sense, like Pirsig's 4th level, but one need not give
up science or metaphysics in order to practice meditation. Sure, one puts it
aside while engaged in the silent workout, but there are many forms of
spiritual discipline that fall short of the abandonment of "the flesh",
"worldly things" or anything that extreme.
Scott said:
However, that is for the individual to do on his or her own, while for
the populace in general, whenever they interact, including on this
forum, it is just plain better intellect that is needed.
dmb says:
Right on! Who was it? Somebody recent expressed some irritation with the
tendencey here to "intellectualize" everything. Hello?! Isn't that like
complaining that water is too wet? We're here to discuss a philosophical
system of thought, after all. Its not reasonable to expect anything else.
Scott said:
There is a moral question as well. It is that there is a danger that if
we give up on the intellect too soon, we are more likely to backslide
than move forward. This is what, in my opinion, is going on with most
New Age stuff, and of course is how Pirsig analyses the Hippie
phenomenon.
dmb says:
Right. The intellect can be a trap, but mostly it is a liberator. In fact,
the concepts of democracy and rights are products of the intellect. The
quest for something beyond it is too often motivated by a kind of romanitic
reactionary impulse to return to Eden before the fall, to our "natural"
state. The noble savage, born free but everywhere in chains... But you know
all that. So such anti-intellectual movement are degenerate. Even though the
desire is for freedom and/or transcendence, such movements fail simply
because regression is not the same as freedom. I think most everybody in our
culture falls for this one to some extent. I mean, if Ben Franklin and Jim
Morrison have it in common, you know there's something big going on.
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 : Sun Jul 13 2003 - 23:32:08 BST