> BO:
> I agree ....to a point...and bear with me Rick while I try to keep all
> the balls - as well as the board - in the air simultaneously? The
> terms intellect and intelligence denotes two different things -
> moqwise seen, but Intellect (as SOM) never got those two sorted
> out, the spectre of "awareness" got into the way. Animals may
> display all sorts of abilities (just heard about an octopus who knew
> how to open screw lids of jars!), but they are "machines"
> programmed by instincts, not to speak of machines/computers that
> are just dispensers of zeros and ones....blah, blah, the SOM-
> sayers go on.
RICK:
I like this last part about animals and machines... they behave "as if" they
had an Intellect. Have you ever read anything by the philosopher Jon
Searle? He talks at length about this sort of fallacy (attributing
intelligence to things that behave "as if" they were intelligent).
>
BO:
> We must regard the pre-moq world as a reality where Intellect
> reigned - as SOM - without competition. It had no inkling of any
> levels in a MOQ sense, its mind-matter reality was all there was.
> Now - after Pirsig - we may regard Q-intellect as analytical reason
> (which IS freedom from social values) while "intelligence" - once the
> "mental" deadweight is jettisoned - are all the various lower levels -
> separate or compound ....including Intellect! (You will know that I
> regard the MOQ as beyond intellect).
RICK:
Hmmm.... you know, I think I agree with what (I think) you're saying here...
and it may solve the SOLAQI problem for me as well (Once a thief is caught a
whole string of crimes are often solved....). My problem with SOLAQI was
mainly that it seemed to confine "reason" to being SOL.... but if you are
making the MoQ itself a 5th level, higher than even Intellect, then I
believe I can now agree with the theory. Work with me here....
In the other forum I was commenting to someone about how SOL is great for
deciding about what "IS" but is essentially useless in deciding about what
"ought" to be... that is, matters of Value and Morality. The MoQ is such a
pattern, it tells us what "is", but also tells us about "oughts". My
problem with SOLAQI was that it made SOL the highest level which has the
effect of excluding reasoning about Value and Morality from the Intellectual
level... but if the MoQ is part of a level higher than Intellect, than it
must be this 5th level which is the source the "oughts"... I hope that makes
sense to you. Does this jive with your view??? And if so, what do propose
the 5th level be called? And what would you say are it's defining
characteristics????
Slowly moseying towards understanding,
Rick
>
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:24 BST