From: johnny moral (johnnymoral@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Jul 14 2003 - 19:23:05 BST
David, Scott, all
>Scott answered Platt:
>My "definition" comes from Owen Barfield's book *Saving the
>Experiences*,...
>Barfield's book argues that this kind of thinking evolved out of an earlier
>situation where the human being did not see himself as separated from the
>perceived world -- indeed that what we call thoughts were then perceived as
>coming from outside, and as connected to what we now call the object of
>perception. ...
>The reason for identifying this situation (the S/O divide) with the fourth
>level (or Q-intellect) is that it is only when you have a subject (the
>thinker feels that he is independent from the thought-about) is it possible
>for there to be an independent level that can be in conflict with the
>social
>level.
Johnny says:
Sounds good Scott, but we know that ancients knew where their body ended and
where the body of the gazelle they were eating started, so they didn't feel
*that* connected, they had an intuitive knowledge of themselves as selves
and the world as objects. So the main change between the new Intellectual
S/O divide that can be in conflict (or, usually, in concert) with the social
level and the old intuitive S/O divide is not thinking of your self as
seperate from objects, but from thinking of yourself as seperate from
society.
>dmb says:
>Right. "Did not see himself as separated from the percieved world." This
>echoes what Powell says about the "name-form continuum", the "universe of
>unity" inhabited by the ancient poets.
Also, the Dakota had this understanding farily recently, perhaps some still
do (hopefully?). (I suppose it is racist to say that, but am I denigrating
a race or its people? I don't feel I am.)
>Social level values are most
>appropriate for this relatively undifferentiated mode of consciousness. It
>also reminds me of something Sam quoted a while back. It seems that the
>artists who painted those cave walls so long ago participated in this
>unified mode of consciousness, and as such did not understand the images as
>symbols of dipictions, but somehow inseparable from the real and actual.
>(Perhaps this small point will dispell the notion that such painting
>represent symbolic, and therefore intellectual, activity.)
That must be how they survived the drought of 10,000 BC, by eating the
paintings.
>I'm not sure if
>Barfield or Powell is talking about something that happened around 450 BC,
>but I've encountered the same basic idea in lots of places. I think of the
>social level mode of consciousness as essentially that of a conformist, not
>so different than we see in people today. There was great intellegence and
>passion and its not that people were somehow savage or ape-like, but things
>like skepticism and doing your own thing just hadn't yet been invented.
Sounds right.
>Anyone who dared to try such a thing would soon be cut down, often quite
>literally. But there is a simple little thing that happened around the time
>Socrates lived; somebody dared to question the gods in public. That
>oversimplifies it, but imagine all that it implies. A loosening of the grip
>of the mythos. Analysis, criticism and improvement becomes possible where
>there was once only the choice to assimilate or die. It like the individual
>could stick his head up out of the social level waters and breathe through
>lungs instead of gills for the first time. With this new ability to stand
>back and look at one's thoughts and beliefs with some degree of skepticism
>and distance comes the loss of the unified world of the ancient poets, but
>something important is gained too; freedom.
Yes, Yes, good points. The individuals questioning the Gods were
questioning the gods IN PUBLIC, they were trying to change society. The
intellectual patterns were about society and acted on society. The patterns
required society to be there first, with its Gods, before they could be
questioned.
Johnny
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
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 Jul 14 2003 - 19:24:46 BST