Re: MD Intelligence in the MOQ

From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Thu Dec 04 2003 - 19:45:32 GMT

  • Next message: David MOREY: "Re: MD Democracy in the MOQ"

    Hi

    I'm pretty sure my dog manipulates symbols
    to get what she wants. But the language of
    visual representation is nothing like as powerful
    as the artificial languages created by humans
    and very powerfully externalisable. Bees are
    pretty good at giving directions for pollen for example.
    But I agree that human language creates a whole
    amazing range of possibilities, above all in an
    individual way.

    regards
    David M

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Paul Turner" <paulj.turner@ntlworld.com>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 4:45 PM
    Subject: RE: MD Intelligence in the MOQ

    > Hi Bo
    >
    > Bo said:
    > At times I have the impression that we have probed the
    > MOQ deeper than Pirsig himself ...and that Paul's "problem" is his
    > will to adjust to all utterings from one who knows no more any longer.
    > Right now he labours at the "symbol-manipulation" definition to fit - as
    >
    > he did the "thought-definition"
    >
    > Paul labours:
    > It may be "labouring" to "adjust to all utter[ances] from one who knows
    > no more any longer" to you, but to me, it's an attempt to clarify and
    > articulate my understanding of a philosopher's ideas while he is still
    > around and willing to share his thoughts. If Pirsig's writing about the
    > MOQ is no longer relevant on this forum then it's time for me to leave.
    >
    > For each level to be discrete it must have boundaries. My attempt to
    > clarify my definition of intellect is concerned with the
    > social-intellectual boundary. Intellect, to me, is still "simply
    > thinking" in that it is not restricted by subject-object metaphysics as
    > you would have it, it is restricted only by the Dynamic Quality which it
    > cannot define intellectually. However, once you make that statement, any
    > fool can come along and say "Doesn't this imply thinking? Doesn't that
    > imply thinking?" and so we reach the unnecessary and misleading
    > conclusion that particles are also thinking and have intelligence. As
    > Pirsig says in his recent letter, we must draw the line somewhere, and
    > this is where skilled symbol manipulation comes in. I add to the symbol
    > manipulation definition - the conscious and deliberate activity of
    > constructing, manipulating or understanding patterns of thought.
    >
    > So, whilst we can colourfully and anthropomorphically say that David's
    > dog "figures out" that this behaviour leads to that consequence, it is
    > when his dog writes David a note asking for a particular brand of
    > chocolate or helps him with his accounts that I would say his dog is
    > acting intellectually.
    >
    > Paul
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > 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
    >
    >

    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 Dec 04 2003 - 19:46:45 GMT