Bo: > > Almost all creatures sleep (even fish it's said) so waking up must > be to state different from oblivion - and animal consciousness. > The nineteenth century spoke about a slumber-like state > regarding animals, but they are much more aware than we need > to be. > > Then only self-consciousness remains as intellect's innermost > citadel; the God's-eye view of reality, and self-consciousness IS > intellect's definition of itself (as SOM) But there is the MOQ > overview and in it intellect has become a mere static level and > hasn't got any consciousness (this concept is part of the S/O > metaphysics) the levels' have only got static value and intellect's > is the S/O disdinction - in this case that of a self detached from > the world it lives in. > Dwai: I see. I think we are approaching this topic in a similar manner, albeit the vector is different that's all. I agree that the Intellect is a static level, since it depends on the set of rules it needs to make it's reality. Intellect is artificial.
If that is the case, then it raises the question, what is that is "conscious"? What is that has this artificial intellect? Bo: > And as you asked: > >> I would like to know more about it (the SOL). > > The above IS the SOL. > > The rest of our exchange will arrive soon. > Dwai: I appreciate the chance to interact with, and see that there are some who are approaching this subject in a manner akin to the philosophers that Pirsig alluded to, as opposed to the philosophological system. Ron: Dwai, your presence, If I may speak for my self, on this forum is most appreciated, I am very interested in your exchange with Bo, Akshay and Myself have been discussing similar issues. I am very interested to see Where this goes. Thank you 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/
