ROGER:
Let me take a stab at tieing all this together.....Would it be correct then
to say that Mind is a self referential pattern of thoughts concerning the
pattern recognizing, pattern-creating force that is associated with a
particular
Biological (brain) and social pattern?
Glove:
in my opinion, Mind is the same as awareness. Mind is not just thought
patterns, but rather the Quality Event between our "self" and the
environment around us. this is accomplished thru an inorganic/biological
network of connections not only within the brain but connections to all the
sensory organs tying us to reality. there is no possible way to say where
these connections begin or end. Mind includes all inorganic, biological,
social and intellect level phenomenon driven by undefinable Dynamic Quality.
Roger:
As you think on that one, let’s move on to intellectual patterns. Platt
previously
summarized that there are three distinct types (at least) of thoughts.
1)Reverie, or
automatic thinking, 2) decision making, and 3) what I characterize as
logically consistent
reality models.
This is disturbing though. How can the first two types of thoughts be
considered superior
to social patterns? How can Pirsig state that “i want a cookie” type
thoughts
is morally
superior to a government or religion? This is silly. And aren’t these
social
patterns all
examples of implemented intellectual patterns? I think so.
Glove:
i would like to refer you to my Forces of Value paper where i outline a
study performed to pin down just where it is that decision making arises. in
that study, "thinking" was broken down into four periods. the first was the
instruction...pre-arranged agreements to partially constrain the
experiments. the second was a stimulus. the subject was asked by the
researcher to associate words. the third period was found to be blank. the
fourth period was the response to the stimulus using the pre-arranged
instructions.
if we approach the problem of intellect from this prospective, we have to
ask ourselves what is occurring in that blank third period. it could be
considered automatic thinking or decision making, yet precisely how this is
accomplished is somewhat of a mystery. all we are doing is putting a name on
something. we are not saying anything concrete at all.
"thinking" cannot be defined as only an intellect level process in the way
we normally define it. what we call thinking is the sum total of our life
experience to the moment, along with an undefinable "somethingness" that is
outside of our experience and yet guides and directs our daily experiences,
constrains it so to speak.
"thinking" is almost exclusively a social level phenomena in day to day
living. we go thru our days talking to ourselves, constantly running an
internal discursive dialogue in our heads, and we call that "thinking". and
in a sense it is. our internal discursive dialogue keeps us grounded in
reality. we tell ourselves what reality is and reality becomes that which we
pretend it is.
the intellect level seems to come into play only when this internal
discursive dialogue stops for short whiles...driving is a prime example. in
fact, if we put our entire atttention into whatever it is we happen to be
doing, the internal discursive dialogue will begin to shut down. this is the
aim of mediation and zazen as well.
the best way for me to explain all this is to look at value force as
creation and discreation. since we can say what is occurring in the first,
second and fourth periods of the above experiment, we can call that created
social patterns of value. but the blank third period has no value until we
look at it as discreated intellect patterns of value associated with the
intellect at work.
XCTO:<<<<<<<
The first principles(intellectual patterns) were
choosing, organizing, and creating rituals and processes of passing on the
best of the Social patterns.>>>>>>>>>
ROGER: Hmmmm I am still confused.....
Glove: me too
XCTO:<<<<<<<<
With the MOQ I think that divorce between
what we think about on social issues and how we reason in the scientific
village and how we talk about when we argue philosophical and moral issues
disappears and we are finally on the chessboard. I see many thread and
paths
to follow so i will stop here and simply state that ALL social groups are in
this MOQ and thus all use intellectual patterns in their own little corners
to
develop the best point of view that dynamically states reality to them.
>>>>>>>>>>
ROGER:
You seem to imply that the key distinction between a social pattern and an
intellectual
pattern is in their values. Social patterns pursue social good,
intellectual
patterns pursue
truth. It seems therefore that a thought could be viewed as both an
intellectual pattern,
and a social pattern... For example “Democracy”. This can be viewed or
judged
both
from its social utility and its logical consistency.
Glove: this arguement seems logical to me until you begin to examine just
what logical consistency is. logical consistency is social level agreements.
logic arose with the ancient Greeks, along with the social level coming into
dominance. logic is not a search for truth but for way to agree on what
reality is socially. it seems to me that the intellect is intent on
overthrowing logic in pursuit of Dynamic freedom.
Bo, what do you think?
BO:<<<<<<<<
The Intellectual level of MOQ is no "measurement" or
consciousness of an objective world...etc, but merely (not "mere" but
..) one reality level.>>>>>>>>>>
ROGER: Consciousness...... how does this fit in with the discussion?
BO:<<<<<<<
Human beings conscious..????? What sets the MOQ apart from SOM is
that it rejects the intellect-as-mind-as-consciousness-as-awareness
notion.
Nowhere (in XCTO’s post did he) imply
the trite SOMish notion that Q-Intellect is "awakening to
consciousness" or "awareness of objective reality". Quality's
intellect was once social value that grew - Grew - GREW and G R E W
until it suddenly was a morality all of itself that no longer could
serve Society.>>>>>>>>>
Glove: this is a very interesting perspective and one i am still wrestling
with.
ROGER
It is starting to come together for me now, but I am still a bit fuzzy on
these concepts.
Brains, minds, social patterns, thoughts and intellectual constructs. They
all blend
together and apart like a fugue. Perhaps the music of reality requires the
interchange?
Your thoughts are appreciated.
Thanks for tying all these threads together Roger.
best wishes,
glove
http://members.tripod.com/~Glove_r/Jaynes.html
Force of Values in the Metaphysics of Quality
http://members.tripod.com/~Glove_r/Bohr.html
Quality is a "Good" Dog; Pirsig and Castaneda Compared
~ Never lend strength to that which you would be free of ~
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:42 BST