.... PART II<br><br>** Language, Rituals and the
MOQ **<br><br>How many time did we discuss language
Bo? Dozens? Hundreds? Well, we used to agree, but
lately I've changed my opinion. I've delivered a message
on MD about it, but really I don't know if you have
seen it. <br><br>It is long, so I did not repost it
here. As I have seen that the thread had been touched
even here, I just repeat some of the tenets. If
someone is interested to the whole message, it is
available at:
<a href=http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/0107/0199.html
target=new>http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/0107/0199.html</a><br><b\
r>I've stated that IMO language is NOT the DNA of
intellect, as we used to agree upon. In few words, the
central tenet is that there is not "one" level of
existence for things, there's just a level in which they
ARISE, then they will be used and empowered, if needed,
by all the upper levels. For example, matter arises
as inorganic, then it's used by every level: a
sculpture is a more evolved form of matter. My current
opinion about language is that it arose as communication
(chemical, phonic or visible or whatever else, it doesn't
matter) , in the biological-to-social transition, so IMO
communication is the biological code for the social patterns.
There's no social pattern without communication.
<br><br>Then intellect found it among the lower level
"things", and empowered it for its purposes. That is:
language is a more evolved form of communication. But it
is not the social code for intellect. If intellect
arises with the concept of the self (and I think you
agree on this more than me), it's hard to see
communication (something that unifies people) as the *maker* of
the self. IMO the social pattern that has created the
individual is the ritual division of labor. <br><br>The
Chapter 30 of Lila seems to support this view:
<br><br>".. anthropological studies of contemporary primitive
tribes suggest that stone<br>age people were probably
bound by ritual all day long. There's a ritual
for<br>washing, for putting up a house, for hunting, for eating
and so on - so much<br>that the division between
"ritual" and "knowledge" becomes indistinct.
In<br>cultures without books ritual seems to be a public library
for teaching the<br>young and preserving common
values and information".<br><br>" These rituals may be
the connecting link between the social and
the<br>intellectual levels of evolution. One can imagine primitive
song-rituals and<br>dance-rituals associated with certain
cosmology stories, myths, which generated<br>the first
primitive religions. From these the first intellectual
truths could<br>have been derived".<br><br>Dividing
labor and giving a component a solitary duty, the Giant
gains the possibility of quick decisions, and becomes
more efficient... while the single becomes a Subject,
more than merely a number: being temporary alone, the
individual has to choose on the basis of his own experience,
and learns to judge his own old choices. <br><br>So,
division of labor and the connected rituals have been the
social basis for the intellect creation. The role of
language is indeed great, but IMHO passive in this
transition. When we need to explain something to someone who
will have to live isolated for some times, we have to
refer to possible future scenarios; and when the
isolated comes back to explain what's happened, he must
use a symbolic language to indicate something past.
And "giving things a name" is VERY intellectual. In
few words what's happened? The *excellent isolated*
invented a different form of communication to share a
different kind of knowledge, and used what was already
available in the lower level (social non symbolic
language), empowering it for the new requirements. Intellect
was born.<br><br>=====<br><br>Well, it's late and I
have to go. It has been *a good* to stay here with
you. Take care of yourselves. Hope to come back
soon.<br><br>Ciao, <br>Marco