> Jennifer and all: Just a few thoughts in response... first, the previous
> exchange...
>
> David wrote,
> "I think there are lots of reasons to be sure that "intellect comes
> after society on the ladder of evolution". But the most compelling thing
> is Pirsig's explaination of the 20th century as a battle between the
> social and intellectual levels. The history of this struggle is a major
> theme throughout the book. You know, the breakdown of Victorian society
> and all that.
> Pirsig even says that this takeover was an evolutionary leap, no less
> important than the "day" our ancestors left the oceans for dry land. So
> we think of the intellect as being on the top rung because it has most
> recently arrived. Its the newest level of reality. Social level values
> have been around much, much longer than that. Its about the order of
> appearance. And this idea isn't arbitrary or merely convenient, it
> corresponds quite well with our scientific understanding of these
> things."
>
> JENNIFER WROTE BACK....
> I have to disagree with you. True, the breakdown of Victorian society
> and the exciting, frightening turbulence left in its wake is an
> important theme. But Pirsig's assumption that this is a step upward
> rather than backward seems to me to be built on shaky ground. Intellect
> has been publicized since at least Socrates, and has been at conflict
> with society throughout its existence. But men could very conceivably
> have been working through intellectual struggles long before that. As
> historians, it's much easier to pinpoint the beginning of cultures with
> all the physical debris that they've left. Can we disregard every
> intellectual who doesn't write a book? Or who doesn't try to implement
> his ideas in a society? Maybe intellectuals really did have to form
> societies in order to advance. Consider Pirsig's description of Dynamic
> Quality (or higher evoltion). It seems that while societies do
> constrain, they also can break up intellectual patterns. The dramatic
> effect of reading books on one's intellect, for example, or the speed of
> new ideas that come from brainstorming, might demonstrate this.
> Intellect can get new ideas straight from DQ, or from society. Then
> again, society doesn't seem to be able to access DQ directly, but only
> through intellect. And I think my use of "society" above was inaccurate
> on two counts. First I was thinking only of human societies, and then I
> was thinking more of intellectual interaction.
>
> New DMB answer...
> Right, the intellectual level shifted into the dominant position early in
> this century, but it existed in an immature state long before that. Pirsig
> describes Socrates as a figure whose life represents the independence of
> the intellect, but it took 2,500 years for that independence to grow into
> dominance. And if we go back in time, say 50,000 years, we'd still be able
> to recognize the intellect in its infancy. It would have probably been the
> domain of a special class within those pre-historic societies, known only
> to Chiefs and Shamen or other leaders. It took time for the intellectual
> level values to evolve to the point where they could actually over-take
> society. And the battle isn't over yet.... Don't let our dazzeling
> technology fool you, we could easily slip back to a situation where
> intellect is merely a tool of social values, as in the case of Victorian
> society. There world was filled with engineering marvels, and yet social
> values ruled over intellect.
>
> And you're right about DQ being the source of new ideas. That's the major
> advantage of the newest level. Its more open to change. It is more free to
> evolve, more open to DQ than all the previous levels. But Pirsig makes the
> point that intellect depends on social values for its existence. Remember
> his correction of Descartes? To be correct Descartes would have to say,
> "French culture exists, therefore I think, therefore I am." Pirsig quotes
> Neils Bohr to make the same point, saying "We are suspended in language".
> I think the essential idea is that intellectual level values are sort of
> "nested" in the previous level. The fourth level is seperate and distinct,
> yet totally dependent on the static quality that came before it.
>
> Thanks for your time.
>
>
>
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:35 BST