From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Thu Nov 06 2003 - 09:57:20 GMT
Mark alias Squonk
3 Nov. 2003 you wrote:
Bo prev:
> We have Pirsig's letter where he draws the
> intellectual line with the Ancient Greeks, but it sounds as only
> from necessity lest it would stretch away into absurdity.
Mark:
> The 'line' as you determine it is not drawn. There can be no such line
> as no one was there to make a note of it.
Pirsig is drawing a broad line.
....I think the same happens to the term, "intellectual," when
one extends it much before the Ancient Greeks.*
* The argument that Oriental cultures would not be classified
as intellectual is avoided by pointing out that the Oriental
cultures developed an intellectual level independently of the
Greeks during the Upanishadic period of India at about 1000
to 600 B.C. (These dates may be off.) The argument that the
MOQ is not an intellectual formulation but some kind of other
level is not clear to me. There is nothing in the MOQ that I
know of that leads to this conclusion.
He says that the Orientals developed intellect at 1000-600 BC ....
.....independently OF THE GREEKS which means that he sees the
Greeks as developing intellect. It frustrates me a little that Pirsig so
reasonably focus on the Greeks as (one) cradle of intellect, but
upholds the impossible "symbol-manipulation" definition (which is
nothing but language).
> What Pirsig indicates is
> that thinking goes back before the Ancient Greeks,
He does and also indicates that it goes back before the social level
...even before the biological one!!!
> but the Ancient
> Greeks established an Intellectually dominated culture. There is no
> line drawn, merely an indication of when records began to display the
> dominance of Intellectual patterns.
According to Pirsig intellect only became dominant in the Western
culture after WW1. ZMM brings an excellent account of the
emergence of intellect. To say that there were patterns before the
levels makes the MOQ go haywire. ....however, from intellect's p.o.v.
everything is "intellect", that is your problem IMO!
> This does not exclude thinking as
> an intellectual activity, because writing, language and the
> manipulation of symbols is an intellectual activity, and is a matter
Language is manipulation of symbols and if that is "intellect" ...well be
my guest.
> The character if patterns which dominate society in Ancient
> Greek culture are therefore extensions of a process already well under
> way, but not yet dominating social patterns - the pinnacle of
> mathematics and abstraction can therefore be well described as
> Intellectual art - the response of Intellectual patterns to Quality.
> of record.
I'll comment when I understand this, but thanks for sticking to the
MOQ. You may find me a PITA, but at least you care.
Bo
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 : Thu Nov 06 2003 - 10:10:02 GMT