Jonathan, Magnus, All
Jonathan
> Magnus, I agree. Perhaps Dave has the answer.
>
> DAVE
> >What is often overlooked is that it SOM, not Pirsig or the MoQ, that
> >divides these four divisions with the top two as subjective and the
> >bottom two as objective.
3WD
But perhaps I don't. More current musings from the horse's mouth
indicate that RMP does indeed support that the split just as it is shown
in the SODV paper.
This is not without merit. Spliting the levels this way provides a clean
break between human experience and all other patterns of value. It makes
the jump from biological and social exclusively human. Defines clearly
what it is to be human.
Society: 1 a group of PERSONS regarded as forming a single community,
esp. as forming a distinct social or economic class.
Social: 1. having to do with HUMAN BEINGS living together as a group in
a situation in which their dealings with one another affect their common
welfare. (my emphasis)
What this avoids is the tendancy of humans to anthropormorphize that
which they have not internally or subjectively experienced. In many
previous discussions and in our common language we often use the term
"social" in relation to other animals. From apes and wolves to bees and
ants we observe behavior which seems somewhat analogous to what we as
people have experienced and thus call it "social".
But do we have any direct internal knowledge of this ? No
Can apes,or wolves, or bees, or ants, and people set down, converse,
compare, qualify, and agree (like people can) on their common internal
experiences ? No
On the other hand, all evolutionary theories and the MoQ, suggest that
there is steady undenable development, progress, or struggle of lower
levels trying to move up the hierarchy. Let's assume at some point in
the not so distant future an ape, or a grey parrot, or a dolphin and man
make this conversational leap. They do converse, compare, qualify and
agree on their common internal experiences.
Has that parrot jumped to the social level?
Does a new level emerge?
What would it be called?
By the parrot?
By the human?
And if not, what level are these patterns on?
And if it's agreed that the parrot has evolved to the MoQ "social level"
is the parrot a "person"?
3WD
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:31 BST