Chris: I will submit two questions to you: The first is on behalf of a friend of mine - a brilliant scientific mind, one for whom science is truly Highest. I have discussed the MOQ for a while with him, and recently I think I have gotten through to him that the Moq is not anti-intellectual or anti-scientific, but rather completes it. Now, I am
mostly interested and concerned with humanities, and the benefit of the MOQ within those disciplines is quite clear to me, but he asked me to submit this question: If the MOQ becomes, well, accepted - how would this affect science do you think? He was wondering how this would, quite practical change things in the way science is practised. [Krimel] I don't think the MoQ would change the way science is practiced so much as it changes our understanding of what science does. As a practical matter science already functions according to the MoQ. Scientists look for static patterns in their data. They look for patterns in the objects and forces they study and the relationships among those objects and forces. Science is essentially skeptical. It does not claim to offer a final solution only a best guess, not certainty but probability. The MoQ as I understand it says that this is not a flaw but the strength of the scientific method. I think your friend is seeing in the MoQ the sort of new age slant that does have a large following here. There are those who believe that enlightenment is best sought in reflection rather than study or that there is more Zen in a forest that a football game or that we can see God more clearly by looking inward rather than outside. I think this hijacks the MoQ and slows its progress. Chris; Another question, only from me: How do you identify the intellectual level? [Krimel] Whether it constitutes the 'intellectual level' or not, I find technology to be a dynamic force in the history of our species. From individual memory to the spoken word to writing to printing to analog recording to digital storage; I think the quantity and quality of information storage and exchange can be seen to evolve in its own right and to change the nature of human interaction. It creates a growth in our collective awareness and consciousness. As an evolutionary level its rate of change is far faster than evolution at the inorganic, biological or social levels. Witness the fable of the butterfly effect or natural selection or the arrowhead or the microwave; all are ideas that spread and change individual perception but are driven by technological advances. But I don't have a fixed opinion and generally defer to Arlo on this. 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/
