The Descent of Pirot

Each _stage_ in pirotology should be given
a proper label.

Grice failed on this front, but aren't 'scientists' _obsessed_ with the 'proper'
terminology.

Also that 'de-volution', or the 'degeneracy' of this or that
trait, should also be taken into consideration -- especially in connection with
the latest brands of 'pirots' -- as we reach the apocalypse, as my
grandmother is prone to say.

So we may consider for our Stage

Stage 0

"Apodeictic". Surely in the realm of inorganitc chemistry it is all a
matter of 'necessary implication' as Jeff Huggins would agree: "You mix the
wrong substances, and POOOF!!!!"

Stage 1

We are in the vertix of 'vita', as the Romance speakers have it -- neither
fish nor fowl. Or rather, either plant or animal (cfr. Alice on
'mustard'). We arrive at something like an "aisthesics": 'bacteria', for example.
Surely they can _feel_ and as Martha Sherwood notes, they should *enjoy*
feeling, too (or at least the Pirot-Maker).

Stage 2

Once the 'pirots' grow _legs_ and thus become 'animal', we reach the level
of the so-called 'instinct' or Drive (Traub) that fascinated the Germans,
etc. It was suggested that I should call this stage, for instinct-driven
systems, "eikasics" -- this applies to one type of zoon only: the
"lopho-trocho-zoon", or animal driven by instinct, in Aristotelian parlance. But then
mostly all animals are instinctive (cfr. Clark and his book on different
conceptions of animals).

Stage 3.

(I'm skipping some stages because here I'm only concerned in Oxford
Paleo-zoic -- after all I have to reach _Grice_, not Confucius, right?). Some of
the wing-endowed insects (ecdyso-zoon) display some sort of a rudimentary
version of (if I may interpolate), 'human' _choice_ (Aristotle's
pro-hairesis -- but in its 'butterfly' format). Thus we postulate this level as
"pro-egmenic". This is, admittedly, an 'all or nothing' choice as I hope you
noted that flies don't really _decide_ where to drop-dead.

Stage 4.

Would be the "pro-hairetic", proper: full, defeasible choice as we find in
middle order vertebrates. E.g. the eagle that Grice examines: she can
choose between killing the rat, the mouse or both (or none). At this stage the
proper nomenclature is a bonus. Martha Sherwood's "bird" as a feathered
zoon is ambiguous: 'aves' is the correct. A 'bird' was originally a brid, a
girl. (cfr. 'bride'). The Anglo-Saxons lacked a concept of 'aves'. (Among
other things -- but they had swords and pillaged Roman Cities). This is also
the realm of "Cats" that Grice adored -- but with 'limit': "Adorable as
these creatures are, we cannot expect that the Pirot-Maker has designed _them_
to absolutise value".

Stage 5

A pirot will _not_ leave a solitary life ("It's not good that a pirot
should live alone", writes the Pirot-Maker). They 'gaggle' and _socialise_ and
not, as eagles do (I'm simplifying here to the Devon Eagle) just for the
mating. This level, it has been proposed, should be labeled "pith-anotic",
from a Greek word meaning 'learn' -- or something. We need only be concerned
with only a few higher stages before we reach Grice -- the highest pirot
(at the peak of evolutionarily self-reflected perfection).

Stage 6.

It has been suggested to me to label a higher stage the "hypo-lepsic".
These are social, but wild, animals (the leo inmanseatus of the Romans).
Dangerous beasts, will do _anything_ to survive -- and the worst of it is that
they are carnivores, only -- and thus we (and other 'fleshly' types) supply
food for them. Also they seem to be almost always hungry. (Females
specially).

Stage 7

At this point the more peaceful 'pirots' descent from the trees, and thus
the development of the brain (or frons, in Latin) ensues. These are what
Linneaue -- who _knew_ -- called 'the primates' from the Latin, primus inter
pares. This stage can be appropriately called the "phronimic" -- after the
Greek for 'brains' ('phronesis'), or more exactly, prudence.

Stage 8.

We reach "Pirot No. 3" (or a "grice", a movable featherless biped who will
karulise elatically for years. After Aristotle, and as a tribute to
"Hum-anism" (as per the Renaissance -- and Grice _was_ a Renaissance Man: he
played Ravel, he enjoyed bridge, cricket, etc. (But if you find that
'Renaissance Man' is a no-no in Oxford feel free to call my _grandfather_ a
Renaissance Man. For this stage, it has been suggested, "spouda-ics"'s the word --
as per Aristotle's name for the virtue of the 'humane' human, which, with
Lockean certitude, we call "a very intelligent rational pirot". (He wrote
'parot', but as Grice says, "It could well be a typo).

Etc.