Physical, Biological, Social, Intellectual
Which one wrote the list?
Trouble is which one accepts the existance of the others?
By putting Intellectual at the top of the list what do we gain and what do
we lose?
SOcieties (non-human ones certainly) benefit individuals, I'm starting to
wonder if the list is upside down!
I once heard the phrase "Life is waters way of getting around on land"
Of course Intellect gives rise to discussion groups!
The MOQ is choice, and with that choice, responsibility, but only to
ourselves and that is ourselves Intellectually , not even biologically. Now
genetics, theres something...
Intellect must have existed BEFORE society. Yet Bob says in L that there is
some time dependant order.
I wonder about this, quite a lot.
Now, the bit that always cuts me up are the paragraphs about the move from
social to intellectual, the first world war and such. I have a sort of
personal attachment to that bit, did we (Europeans) lose our faith in
Society or maybe the Society that Bob speaks of here is a society that
individuals had submitted themselves to, is late 20th centuary
Intellectualism a backlash against the failings of a considered mass mind?
The Intellect was there all along, at the moment of the physical.
The biological is a cute Physical
and Society is nothing but a biology of biologies.
I never did get why anyone needed a second book!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk [SMTP:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]
> On Behalf Of Fintan Dunne
> Sent: Tuesday, 15 December 1998 19:42
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Subject: Re: MD Program: Brain, Mind and Intellect
>
> ROGER RECANTS: THE INQUISITION RECLAIMS A HERETIC?
> The genome project is an attempt to uncover material immortality.
>
>
> >THREE LEVELS OR FOUR? ROGER GIVES UP HIS
> >SHORT LIVED LIFE ON THE WILD SIDE
>
>
> Hi Roger
>
> Let me respond to your document of recantation:
>
> >MAGNUS responded to my suggestion as follows:
>
> ><<<The cause of the confusion you're expressing is that people, with
> >intellectual patterns, are parts of a society (a social pattern).
> >This is not absurd or contradictory in any way. It's perfectly
> >alright for a society to use people as building blocks because
> >people are patterns of all levels. It doesn't make society a
> >higher level than intellect>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>
> Seems a bit contradictory to me, Magnus.
> Like having your cake and eating it.
> Society uses people as building blocks.
> It IS a higher level. Period.
>
> >MARY: <<<A social pattern valuing freedom, truth, and clarity is
> >superior to other social patterns because it is an enabler for the
> >intellectual level.......
>
>
> So the intellect leapfrogs society to become a new level.
> Enabled by society eh? Pirsig says the intellect had to escape from
> society not be enabled by it.
>
> >MARY>>>The social value of the right to
> >think freely is a high quality social level value. This value is of high
> >quality because it allows the intellectual level free riegn to think
> about
> >anything. since the intellectual level is a more advanced level this is
> >good.
>
> Once again this contradics the competitive inter-level theory of MOQ
> Of course it does, because all this is an attempt to wolly-think around
> the
> problem that Social Good is the top level.
> It is informed- but not transcended by the individual/group mind.
>
> >Horse then jumped in to argue with JB:
> >JB: <<< "The Enlightened value the Truth", but our society values
> something
> >else.>>>>
> >HORSE: <<Of course it does. It values its own existence and if that means
> that
> >members of society are destroyed or removed for whatever reason then this
> is
> >fine for society as a whole. Thus the expression, "The greatest good for
> the
> >greatest number".>>>>>>>
>
>
> Pirsig himself argues that Society is quite right to perpetuate itself.
> Look what happened in Russia when intellect overthrew society.
> The promise of equality turned out to be absolute dictatorship.
> That is why Jesus refused to lead a revolution against Rome and the
> corrupt local administration. "Render unto Caesar" was a defense of
> society.
>
> >I believe these to be the learning stages of an emerging value
> >level. With its hierarchical position at the top, its mistakes and
> successes
> >are magnified beyond those of its predecessors. Its patterns will learn
> and
> >progress as it follows its own values toward truth and clarity.
>
> No. This is just the arrogance of intellectualism. What has emerged is
> regressive,
> not progressive. Intellectualism desires material eternal life and the
> murder of God.
> The genome project is an attempt to uncover material immortality.
>
> >DIANE: <<<<....someone said that we're getting confused because
> >the social and intellectual levels are so deeply intertwined. I think
> >this is true and it's because of the way the two have evolved molding
> >and mediating each other as they go. The social level appropriates the
> >intellectual level for its own purposes....... There are many sets of
> >intellectual reality in existence and we can perceive some to have more
> >quality than others, but that we can do so is, in part, the result of
> >our history and current patterns of values. >>>>>>>>>>>
>
>
> In fact, Diana point the way to the reality that the top level of the MOQ
> is
> Social-Intellectual or Social-Mind to be more correct, for the rational
> intellect is one part of mind and is counterparted by instinctive art
> mind.
>
> Society and Mind are the SAME thing !
> Only intellectualism believes they are not and so mounts the ivory tower.
>
> love
>
> fintan
> findunne@iol.ie
>
>
>
>
> homepage - http://www.moq.org
> queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
> unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
> body of email
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 - 16:02:44 BST