Chris, And I was questioning your reasoning, which was *based* on that example.
Marsha At 08:03 AM 2/14/2008, you wrote: >Hi > >Marsha: > > I am not inclined to agree or disagree with your conclusions. As I > > read your little tale, I seemed to be reading some vague 'we said' - > > 'they said' generalities. Assumptions were made, then conclusions drawn. > > > >Well, it's the ideas behind it that is important really. This was mostly an >attempt to make an example. From where I stand now it seems to work. > >IMO > >chris > > > At 05:52 AM 2/14/2008, you wrote: > >>All of You > >> > >>Some of what is said here may seem unimportant or elementary to you, some > >>of > >>it however may not, so - MOQers bare with me on this one: > >> > >> > >> > >>Some time ago me and two friends were at a small hostel in the North of > >>New > >>Zeeland, we were sitting in the garden and eating our cheap, poorly cooked > >>meals when a class of American students joined us in the afternoon sun. > >>The > >>three of us had been sitting talking about the various things we always > >>talk > >>about, the future, love and the general nature of the world and our place > >>in > >>it, but after a while we all trailed of as we couldn't help but listening > >>to > >>the loud conversations taking place across the lawn. > >> Our fellow travellers where arguing, laughing and speaking > >> in each others > >>mouths, clearly a group of people that knew exarchate quite well. But as > >>we > >>sat there we was dumbfounded over one especially strange phenomena. There > >>seemed to be no thought behind the words spoke whatsoever. That is, during > >>the two hours we sat there in the sun, no analysis of any kind accompanied > >>the statements of observation that was all the Americans conversation was > >>constructed of. It was ALL statement. "I did that, then he did that and we > >>reacted thus" Statements of facts, statements of reaction to things > >>observed. No analysis whatsoever. We marvelled over this with mixed > >>feelings. It was clearly a nice group of people who were having a lot of > >>fun, and on some level we envied that, while at the same time we were > >>feeling alienated because of the things that was being stated. On some > >>level > >>is the key here. > >> Because later we would discuss this further, being one of > >> those groups of > >>people who like to sit around with some cigarettes and coffee and > >>philosophy > >>in our own lazy manner when we have the chance, and we concluded that the > >>feeling of both aversion and some kind of envy had been with us in many > >>situations such as this - mostly on parties and such. > >> It stuck me later what the answer to all of this was. Here > >> were two sets of > >>Good, two sets of Quality competing against one another. Reasoning is an > >>attribute to the 4th level, that seems clear, and the conclusion I have > >>drawn is that people can be more or less dominated by any of the levels. > >>When we sit around, reasoning about things in general, analyzing, we are > >>following our inclination to the 4th level, we would seem to be > >>individuals > >>that are far more dominated by the 4th, reasoning level then any other. > >>The > >>Americans in question was all consumed by the social level, everything > >>they > >>did, thought and said was done in service to the social level, of which > >>reasoning is not part. I have no doubt that most of them would be able to > >>reason just fine, had they deemed it a Good thing - however - they didn't > >>need to, because in the situation they where, social values were the > >>dominant level. The social level also has an immune system towards > >>reasoning, and it's summoned up in the word "nerd". Nerd means "of low > >>social Quality" and they are right! > >> All of us will occasionally let our biological > >> interpretations of what is > >>Good run free - most notably in bars and such, but we know how Low Quality > >>it would be to let this overwrite our social interpretations of Good - or > >>our intellectual. Most of the time. Depending on how strongly one is > >>dominated by a given level though. > >> My point though is that the group of Americans DID think, > >> they did use > >>their brain capacity fully, for they were in no means stupid, but > >>everything > >>they did with their brains was done from a social view of Quality. Maybe > >>they could reason fine, as I said, but they didn't. Now, at present time, > >>rationality is continuing it's crusade against the lover levels of > >>Quality, > >>and it is doing it by perhaps the most efficient weapon ever: school. So > >>today, for a person grown up in a western country it might very well be > >>impossible not to know of rationality, of the basic Subject/Object ideas, > >>but it IS possible not to service that level, and to be a totally social > >>being - a biological might be possible to, if it weren't for the fact > >>that > >>the social and intellectual levels have a tendency to lock anybody who > >>does > >>so in a small room for a few years. > >> From a MOQ perspective, it is all just different ways of reacting > >> to > >>Quality, but that is the way we see it - if we truly do. > >> > >> > >>I put it to you that the different value patterns are essentially all > >>different ways of which to respond to and interpret Quality, and within > >>every level, that specific way to react to Quality is all that matters. > >>This > >>is beeing said from a MOQ perspective, who in this since is so > >>fundamentally > >>different from all the other levels that it has the potential to bring > >>about > >>a new level of it's own. It will most likely not happen in the nearest 500 > >>years, the first step would probably be for rationality to gain total > >>supremacy of the social level, but this all fits, and that's the important > >>part of it. > >> > > >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/ Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars... 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/
