[Platt] How else could animals respond other than at the molecular level? [Arlo] So now your claim is that only the cat's molecules responded at one point to DQ, but not the cat. Is that correct?
[Platt] Do you think a cat responds to DQ? If so, how would you know? What would a cat do to demonstrate such a response? [Arlo] Anytime a cat responds to "it's better here" it is responding to DQ. A cat, however, can only respond biologically to DQ, so it lacks the social and intellectual repertoire of responses "man" has available. [Platt] Even a cursory knowledge of evolution would inform you that your questions are absurd. So there is no point in answering them. [Arlo] See, here's were you get deceptive. They are direct, valid questions that must be addressed given your philosophical claims. You only claim them "absurd" because you KNOW that answering them will show your position to be ridiculous. So you use these types of smoke and mirror tricks. Now I can add some others given your latest claim. If "only the molecules of cats" could respond to DQ, does that mean that only the molecules of man respond to DQ? Could the molecules of an adult cat respond to DQ? Or only invitro embryo molecules? [Platt] Also I find it interesting that you purport to be able to read Pirsig's mind and correct him as to what he really should have said -- like a teacher correcting a student. [Arlo] No. Like two adults disagreeing. I would welcome Pirsig's responses to my questions as well. As I said, nothing ever "lost" the ability to respond to DQ, as evolutionary gains were main, certain patterns "gained" a phenomenal new repertoire of responses. But nothing ever "lost it". [Platt] ... especially when you live out "man" when referring to the social level. [Arlo] Yeah, I see what are doing. Distract, evade, distort. In any event, I've made it clear many times that I don't "leave man out" of the social level, but I do include certain primates and mammals as evidencing rudimentary social behaviors. That is in disagreement with Pirsig, as I know quite well. [Platt] Then what can it do? Or a rock? Or a rope? Or a road? I look forward to believable answers on how such patterns respond to DQ. [Arlo] They respond inorganically. Change the environment, witness a change, inorganic responses to DQ. Nothing "marvelous" from our socio-intellectual vantage point to be sure. But let me ask counter. Go way back in paleohistorical time. Before animals. Before plants. Before amoebas. What do you propose COULD respond to DQ back then? Rocks? Atoms? And what is it that they could do differently THEN that they can no longer do? I would say "nothing". They could do nothing then that they can't do now. Their responses were, then and now, entirely constrained by their inorganic nature. Now, take a crack at those questions. Or at least have the intellectual honesty to admit you can't answer them without demonstrating the absurdity of your claims. If its just the same old game with you, just say so and we can end this now. To restate. If animals could respond to DQ in the past (DQ-animals), (1) what was the nature of this ability? what could they do?, (2) was there ever an overlap, a time when both DQ-animals and DQ-man walked the earth together? Or did DQ-animals in North America "lose" their DQ-ness when DQ-man appears in Africa? (3) was there ever a time when NOTHING on the earth could respond to DQ? Before "man", was it always that something, somewhere could respond to DQ? During the time of the dinosaurs, for example, what was DQ-enabled? T-rex? Lemurs? Ferns? (4) Extending that, before the era of animals, is your proposal that "plants" could respond to DQ? If not, what? If so, what is the nature of how those plants could "act" that they can no longer do? (5) When "cats", to use one example, could respond to DQ (DQ-cats), what could they do then that they can no longer do now? Again, speculate. Did they have "free will" when they were DQ-cats? And, importantly (6) why did DQ-animals lose their ability? If they could respond to DQ, what made them stop? Is your assumption that humans could one day "lose" the ability to respond to DQ? If not, why not? 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/
