From: Pi (pi@mideel.ath.cx)
Date: Mon Jul 14 2003 - 21:06:51 BST
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 05:43:25PM +0000, johnny moral wrote:
> >> Any takers?
> >
> >After talking about why it is unnecessary and futile to define
> >intellectual patterns of Quality, I will do just that. Why? Because I
> >value doing that. :)
> >
> >I cannot give a 'dictionary definiton' of intellectual patterns because I
> >don't think of it in that form. I consider intellectual patterns to the be
> >the patterns of Quality that include reason, logic, rationality,
> >irrationality,... basically anything that involves thought. If needed, I
> >can provide examples and arguments to back up my understanding. But I
> >think it is straightforward and should not come as a surprise.
> >
> >What do you (the reader) think about this pseudo-definition?
> >
> >- Pi
>
> Hi Pi,
>
> One interesting thing about those words (reason, logic, rationality) is
> that there is a social component to them, they are used mainly to argue
> with other people, to convince or explain. Something is reasonable if
> there is an intersubjective agreement that it is reasonable. Thoughts that
> we have in our head when we are choosing what car to buy, say, are sort of
> silent arguments with make-believe adversaries, so that we are ready to
> explain why we chose what we did should anyone ask. If we just chose the
> car that seemed like the car we should choose because that was the car that
> most people chose (or celebrities chose, celebrities are celebrated as
> social pattern propogators), that would be following the social pattern.
> Thinking about what car to buy becomes intellectual when it becomes an
> argument with other people about what car is best, what would be the best
> car for society. I know we think we are getting the best car for ourselves
> only, but we are really having a little rational argument with people about
> society's best interest when we do it.
>
> Pi, what do you think of my stressing the "intellectual patterns operate on
> social patterns" angle? Of the novel/computer heirarchy? Was that the
> 'huh?' that was mystifying you?
>
> Johnny
Hi Johnny,
Thanks for pointing out that those words I used to define intellectual patterns have a strong social pattern influence. It further strengthens my point that intellectual (and other) patterns are fluid. They show aspects of other levels of patterns. Overall there is a lot of overlap and this makes it very hard to cleanly seperate one pattern from another.
Maybe it would be better to say that intellectual patterns are those patterns that vanish once we die. Although, there are once again exceptions to this. Plato died but his intellectual patterns are still around.
And the 'huh?' in the subject was not supposed to show my mystification. See my original post for this thread. :)
Cheers,
- Pi
-- Education is what remains after one has forgotten everything he learned in school. -- A. Einstein 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 - 20:11:18 BST