2021-03-31 I read "The Minimum Definition of Intelligence" some time ago. I thoroughly recommend it to everyone reading this. The booklet is political in nature. However, unlike most political texts, this one does not seek to force its ideology unto the reader. Instead, it is a text that seeks to enlighten the reader and make them able to discover their own view on the world. As the authors themselves put it in the post-notes: "This booklet is part of the collective self-theory of the members of our organization. It is the statement of what we call our meta-theory, our theory of the practice of theory-making." One of the main points the authors try to make is that we are often faced with two views on some political or other matter, and forced to pick one of them to agree with. According to the writers, this is unreasonable because in essence, they share the same roots. An example of this the text presents is the divide between eastern "communism" and western neoliberalism. We are often presented with these two sides as opposites. However, if one looks at the way people live in both kinds of societies, they have a lot in common. In the United States, the working people produces something of value for their superior in the hierarchy so they can get a wage and continue on living. Was it not this way in the Soviet Union, or for a more recent example, the state of China? In both situations someone is working for someone higher in the hierarchy than themselves. The differences between working for the state and working for a private corporation is merely surface level; the circumstances the workers find themselves in are the same. Of course, explaining these examples in such a short format is doing the text a disservice. The authors formulate their ideas much clearer than I have the ability to do here. My reading of "The Minimum Definition of Intelligence" has certainly made me examine cases more carefully than before. This realization, that you have to look at the root causes and beyond the surface level of problems*, is what the authors are trying to convey with this booklet. In my opinion, they succeed wonderfully. *: Of course, to look "beyond the surface level of problems" is something many, if not everyone learn is the right way to think even at a young age. With "surface level" in this context, I am more specifically referring to the "normal" way of thinking many people have; the norms of common thought and society. You can find the document in its entirety here or here.
built with sh(1) and cat(1)