Magnus Berg (qmgb@bull.se)
Fri, 19 Sep 1997 12:30:33 +0100
Bo wrote:
> For Diana:
>
> I read the portion of LILA you referred to, and you are right; he speaks
> about various things as CELEBRITY DEVICES. The line opens by his saying
> that celebrity is a dynamic quality within a static social level of
> evolution (like sex is on the static biological level). OK, I may be
> painting myself into some corner here, but this is the way I interpret
> this.
Magnus:
I agree all the way. Celebrities allows societies to change, just as sex
allows spieces to change. That's just another way of putting what you said
but that's never in vain.
And I hope no one is keeping anything inside just because of fear of
painting oneself into a corner. God knows I've been painting all over
the place, I just hope there will be a door open where I hit the wall.
Bo wrote:
> You accused me of suddenly claiming demigod status for humans. The
> Intellectual value level IS a higher morality than the Social one, so in
> that capacity we have occupied the high ground and dominate the lower, but
> in no way do we have a (demi-)God's eye view of OBJECTIVE REALITY. I do
> not deny your cat a rich experience, wisdom, emotions, ability to "think",
> miss its pal etc., but not by way of symbols - language. In the old days
> there was a famous American author/advisor, Helen Keller (Platt may
> remember her?) who was born blind, mute and deaf. In her autobiography she
> describes the event when she crossed into the realm of language and
> intellect. Her tutor had tried to bring her over by writing in her palms,
> but Helen had not grasped the connection between words and sensation, until
> one day when she poured water over one of her hands and wrote "water" in
> the other. She describes it as a flash: a revelation, she suddenly "saw".
> >From then on it was plain going and she became an intellectual celebrity
> (!) giving "chautauquas" in magazines and newspapers. There is no smooth
> transition from the Social to the Intellectual, it is another dimension.
Magnus:
I don't know if I've expressed this clearly enough, but I *do* think that
our human society have the capacity for intellectual patterns on top of it,
and that most animal societies don't. And that, in turn, depends on exactly
what I think you've been saying, that we have a language advanced enough to
support intellectual patterns. I'm not really sure exactly what those patterns
are though, or if they're really there. The intellectual patterns I mostly talk
about though, are the ones on top of what I think as a society of cells,
our body. Two, SOM-wise different things, but in MoQ they are the same.
Magnus
-- post message - mailto:skwok@spark.net.hk unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:41:56 CEST