> [Platt] > Thus, atoms once were able to respond to DQ but no longer can. Similarly, > animals could once but no longer can. > > [Arlo] > Did these animals have "free will"? Give me an example from any understanding > of animal science as to a behavior or ability animals had when the could > respond to DQ that they can no longer do. Were all animals able to respond to > DQ at some point? Or just a select few? Take "cats", go as far back into > paleohistory as you need, was there ever a "cat" that could respond to DQ? If > so, what was it able to do? Give me some evidence (or just speculate) about > something that DQ-cats "did" that they can no longer "do".
If I could do that I would be some kind of hero to the evolutionists. About all anyone can say is what Pirsig said: "What distinguishes all the species of plants and animals is, in the final analysis, differences in the way carbon atoms (proteins and DNA) choose to bond." (Lila, 11) Precisely when this took place in the case of cats or any other life form, including the first one, is anybody's guess. > Also, speculate, when did animals "lose" the ability to respond to DQ? Did > they > suddenly lose this ability when "man" appeared? Did DQ-animals in North > America > lose this ability when DQ-man appears for the first time in Africa? Or was > there an overlap, a time when on this planet there were DQ-animals and man > coexisting? Again, I can't give you a specific time when lower life forms lost the ability to respond to DQ. Nor can anyone else I would venture to say. When did the semipermeable cell form? When did the shift occur from mitosis to meiosis to permit sexual choice? When did cells organize into metazoan societies called petunias and cats? When did animals acquire bones, shells, hides, fur, burrows, etc. Your guess is as good as mine. > For me, cats were always "cats". They did not have some DQ-ability and then > lose it. They could always, as they do today, respond to DQ from within the > constraints and affordances of their biological boundedness (and given their > complexity within that level, for example, a "cat" has a greater repertoire of > responses to DQ than an amoeba, but both are limited by not having social or > intellectual existences). With the advent of human society and intellect, our ability to respond to DQ as individual, bounded life forms "emerged," leaving behind at the physical and biological levels overwhelming static patterns that have effectively stopped forces and forms at those levels from answering the call of DQ. Or, even if they can, being unable to do anything about it. (That's where the limits imposed by the levels come in.) Or so I believe based on my interpretation of the MOQ.. 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/
