Cool Bo,

I am relieved that you agree that quality cannot manifest without the
inorganic and you go on to say further that "Quality's first manifestation
was/is the inorganic level"; you add weight to the Krimel's assertions about
a 'Top Down Fallacy'. Straying for a moment from your SOLAQI notion though,
there is another conundrum here in that as quality gets, for want of a
better word, digested by the upper levels it results in increasingly
intentional action that creates new value ultimately reshaping the
inorganic, alluded to by Gav in that thread.

I guessed that English wasn't your first language. Strictly speaking I'm a
European too but not from the mainland. I'm glad you didn't take offence and
can now say I think I'm improving at translating what you mean when you
discuss these convoluted ideas.

You paraphrased my original question about cats but even then you do not
give a straight yes or no; are you a Zen monk?

You then said that "Cats are certainly INTELLIGENT but is neither part of
the social nor of the intellectual levels, particularly the latter where the
'self-awareness'  term - not belong - but was CREATED". I surmise that you
mean no! And further your statement suggests to me you think both the social
and intellectual levels of the MoQ relate only to humans. Also it seems to
me from your statement that you think the term 'self-awareness' is linked to
the use of language; if the cat could refer to itself as 'me' you would then
say it is self-aware.

Cats are social beings and their behaviour suggests to me that they are
self-aware; for example my sleeping cat reacts almost instantly to me
touching a single one of his hairs. The names for the MoQ levels must relate
to their everyday meaning otherwise we'll all be chasing each other's tails
in these emails forever. The way I see it all life is to some degree
self-aware in that even microbes respond to their environment.

You confirm my interpretation of your point of view with 'At the bio.(cat)
level this does not include a self or language, particularly not the
internal kind we call "thinking"'. You reinforce this later with 'language
came the silent form called "thinking"'. Agreed that real language is unique
to humans but language is only a means of communication between humans and
thought must take place before being expressed in language otherwise I
wouldn't be able to translate your occasionally quirky use of English. To me
the SA's cougar that hesitates before leaping the ravine clearly indicates
it has a conception of itself and it's future. This is the main reason I
have such difficulty in equating SOM with the intellectual level. Going back
to Pirsig, his second main division was of the static quality into Mind and
Matter and to me that remains the fundamental split of reality into subjects
and objects.

You have yet to convince me but kind regards,

-Peter
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to