Hi Ron Aug.18
> Bo before: > > As said if the MOQ uses this basic thinking as definition it's lost. As > > tried to convey to Ron people from/at the logical level Oops, hope you understood that "logical level" was supposed to be "social level". > > (where emotions dominate) think motivated by emotions and possibly find > > reason for their conclusions, but thinking at the intellectual level is > > all about arriving at "objective" conclusions. My dictionary say > > "distancing oneself from emotions and INSTINCTS, but the latter is > > biology and no one is fooled by that, however EMOTIONS (social level) is > > the great temptation because SOM has no social level. Ron: > Bo, if you could answer one question for me please, How does MoQ > provide greater explanatory power than SOM? If SOM is intellect and > devoid of emotion and instinct which is of the lower social order, how > then does MoQ provide any greater meaning to SOM? thanks The short version: By making SOM its own 4th static level all SOM-induced paradoxes dissolve.They were created from the premises that the S/O split was fundamental and the degradation to a mere static value level makes them (the paradoxes) vanish, no level is fundamental (pursued deep enough they merge with the level below). The long version: First of all "SOM" is MOQ's term for existence while the Western Scientific Attitude (WSA) dominated. an attitude that had its start with the Greeks as told in ZAMM . The said WSA did not regard itself a SOM, to it "metaphysics" was an futile effort to find an order to existence that that exceeded the only order that WSA recognized, namely the natural laws. Least of all it recognize that the subject/object distinction was its own creation, objective was how the material world worked while subjective was how people of old believed it worked, and how many gullible fools still think it works. SOM worked and still works well, but its last variety - the mind/matter one - started to show cracks when pursued deeply enough. Matter as "substance" dissolved and mind - the observer of it all - was after all subjective!! This is the chief paradox from which many lesser spring and creates SOM's "poor explanatory power". A paradox is the sure sign that something is wrong with the basic assumptions and MOQ says that the S/O assumption is the culprit and introduces its own DQ/SQ schism and this plus the static levels provides us with a new explanation that makes tons of sense compared to the SOM > If SOM is intellect and devoid of emotion and instinct which is of the > lower social order,how then does MoQ provide any greater meaning to > SOM? thanks SOM stripped of it's metaphysical "M" - leaving only the S/O distinction - is MOQ's intellectual level and it's value is formidable it lifts existence out of the social level's emotions (instinct is biology and that we may leave alone). About dissolving the most apt example is this: We know that the first Greek Physics created many paradoxes and these weren't dealt with until Newton's Physics, the point is that the Greek paradoxes weren't solved rather they went away in light of the new basic assumptions and this is how the MOQ deals with SOM's problems, there is no problem how mind interacts with matter, thoughts with bodies, culture with nature, soul with body ..etc because there is no fundamental S/O split, only a pragmatic (static one) but even so the intellectual S/O has given mankind technology - modernity itself. IMO Bo 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/
