Morrn Christoffer
>> Please Christoffer. Start thinking for yourself, go out, look at things,
>> processes, buildings, people, dogs, what they do, what they say,
>> everything.
>> Then try to make sense of what you see in terms of the MoQ. *Everything*
>> has to
>> make sense. If one dog barks and you can't explain why, then your version
>> of the
>> MoQ fails and you have to change it. Then try again. Then look at movies
>> and do
>> it all over again, look at old movies and new movies and especially Sci-Fi
>> movies, they're the real test.
>>
>>> A ROCK - From a MOQ perspective - by the way - is a static inorganic
>>> pattern. It may also be used as an expression of social values depending
>>> on
>>> how it is used, and if the intellectual level is to look at a rock it
>>> would
>>> be - a rock, an object made up of matter. Whatever matter is ^__^
>> Good, but for some reason, Bo refuses to say this. He probably thinks I
>> have a
>> trap set up for him. And BTW, not sure why you first say that a rock is an
>> inorganic pattern, then you say it's an object made of matter from the
>> intellectual level. Why is it two different things?
>
> Here is your real mistake. From each level the world/everything/allting etc
> is reality, it's all there is.
Nah, I would say the world from each level is patterns of that level and below.
> What's more, from a MOQ perspective, with a SOL definition I find that
> *everything* falls into place. It really does.
Ok, if you're too lazy to go out and look at the world, at least read my essay.
It's in the forum at moq.org
> See, It is NOT as you
> constantly misinterpret it that we choose different mind sets and thus
> choose different levels to focus our self at - we are all of them, and since
> each of them has a different reality it can't really be done like you say -
> although a SOM mind would probably say so. Now listen to this:
You can quit accusing me for being stuck in SOM, it won't stick.
It is not I who claim we shift focus, it's Bo! Put the blame where it belongs.
I'm merely describing what's wrong with his view. And sometimes it seems you
don't really buy it, but then later you say you do.
> In present day Sweden reason has pretty much prevailed. That doesn't mean
> that social values aren't still around and that they sometimes goes against
> reason completely (KD bra exempel? ^^) They are two patterns of Good who are
> in conflict. One is reasonable, one is not. One is Socially Good, one is
> not. That's hard lining it, since most people (I Sverige iallafall) get
> impressions of Good, Value, Quality, from all levels, and what then matters
> is which Static Patterns of Value any given person is inclined to
> follow/reast to mostly. MAKE NO MISTAKE! It is NOT a choice of the "Mind"
> what static pattern of Good any given person is to follow (I.e. it is NOT a
> rational decision and it is not something that comes from the brain at all)
> it is an overall reaction to Quality.
Yes, actually, the "frame of mind" or "focus" or whatever you'd like to call
it,
*is* a good way to reason about human interaction. It works ok since
intellectual patterns can represent other patterns of lower value, and
therefore
you can intellectually reason like you do above, and also as Bo does up to a
certain point.
However, this point of view requires that you lower the bar for the 4:th level
to a point where anything that represents anything else is an intellectual
pattern. If you raise it to Bo's "standards", any intellectual pattern that
represents a lower pattern, is not an intellectual pattern, which contradicts
itself. So, Bo end up calling thoughts about social interaction "social
patterns", and thoughts about biology such as sexual urges, biological
patterns,
and then thoughts about inorganic patterns becomes inorganic patterns.
This is probably why he refuses to answer the simple question about what a rock
is in terms of the levels.
> The Rock is a inorganic pattern from a MOQ perspective, and it is matter
> from a SOM perspective - it is perhaps a part of God in a world view based
> in the social level, it doesn't really matter, what matters is that all of
> these explenations is right, from each level's perspective. And all of them
> are in conflict. So the MOQ says.
The rock is an inorganic pattern, yes. But the levels are not in conflict, they
depend on each other. Sometimes higher level patterns dominate lower patterns,
but if it destroys them, it also destroys itself. If you destroy the cells of
your brain, you go as well, so you can't go to war on biology.
Magnus
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/
