RE: MD myths and symbols

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sun Aug 10 2003 - 22:47:56 BST

  • Next message: Paul Turner: "RE: MD Value of thinking"

    Paul,

    Platt:
    > If this is accurate, then we can agree that intellect as thinking
    > (manipulation
    > of symbols) began with early man, but that the intellectual level as the
    > mind of modern Western man emerged, as you say, around 500 BC.
     
    > Paul:
    > I don't think the distinction between mind and thinking is necessary to
    > understand what is meant by "the intellectual level". We don't
    > hierarchically distinguish between "matter" and "gravitation" at the
    > inorganic level or between "the human body" and "sex" at the biological
    > level or between "government" and "legislation" at the social level.

    Point taken.

    > Remembering that the MOQ postulates that all static quality is patterns
    > of value differentiated experience, and that everything is transitory
    > and stable only in terms of recurring experience, we could do well to
    > consider that verbs describe reality better than nouns.

    I doubt it. Consider the final paragraph in Lila:

    "Good is a noun. That was it. That was what Phaedrus had been looking
    for. That was the homer, over the fence, that ended the ball game. Good
    as a noun rather than as an adjective is all the Metaphysics of Quality
    is about. Of course, the ultimate Quality isn't a noun or an adjective
    or anything else definable, but if you had to reduce the whole
    Metaphysics of Quality to a single sentence, that would be it."

    > However, it really isn't necessary to do away with the backbone of our
    > language as long as it is understood metaphysically that nouns are a
    > linguistic term referring to recurring experience only. As such, the
    > concept of "mind" is shorthand for the collection of mainly linguistic
    > symbols that stand for recurring experiences differentiated at all
    > levels.

    So "mind," a noun, is a recurring experience of recurring experiences
    which, having said that, becomes a recurring experience of previous
    recurring experiencies, ad infinitum. Intellect (as logos) does have it
    limits wouldn't you say? :-)

    > I think that static intellectual patterns are just ideas and
    > relationships between ideas. Look at this dialogue from LC p517

    So would it is be fair to say that in your opinion another name for the
    intellectual level is the "idea level," the level where all ideas,
    concepts, thoughts, opinions, beliefs, theories, doctrines, creeds,
    etc., belong, regardless of their origin in time or individual?

    > Platt:
    > Like Paul I'm wary of those who purport to know how and what people
    > thought thousands of years ago. Civilizations like Egypt were not built
    > by numbskulls. But that logic was first codified by Aristotle I've no
    > doubt. That magnificent work sparked a sea change in man's thinking,
    > creating the initial stage of the intellectual level which was later
    > solidified by the Galileo and Kepler who introduced empiric-analytic
    > science by insisting on measurable experiments.
     
    > Paul:
    > This is one explanation that works within limits but where does it place
    > thinking prior to Aristotle? Where does it place the thinking of the
    > Australian Aborigines? They have a whole cosmology which explains
    > experience perfectly to them which has nothing to do with Aristotle.

    The aborigines engage in mythical thinking supported by ritual as
    opposed to logical thinking supported by measurement of displacements
    in time and space. Mythos vs. logos. Or, groupthink vs. autonomous
    individual. Or, social values vs. intellectual values.

    Platt:
    > Be that as it may, do you also see a distinction between intellect
    > and the intellectual level as presented in the MOQ?

    Paul:
    > No.

    Then I take you believe the intellectual level emerged with the first
    human, and that Lila herself had intellectual quality like everybody
    else. Right?

    Cheers,
    Platt

    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 Aug 10 2003 - 22:46:10 BST