Hi DMB
> dmb says: For whatever its worth, I do usually read your posts and,
based on
> your recent claim that the inside of a cell is a society, figured
you'd
> disagree with me on this. And yes, of course I have thought about what
the
> social level is. And yes, I do take Pirsig's word on what Pirsig means
by the
> term "social". If we extend the term down to the biological level it
no
> longer has the same meaning and we've only erased a useful
distinction.
Hang on. You're talking as if the distinction was useful in the first
place, but
I claim it's not. I have spent quite a few hours thinking about why, and
the
result is in my essay.
> I'd
> say this is relevant intellectually, if that's what you mean by
> metaphysically relevant. I mean, these descriptions and distinctions
are just
> Pirsig's way of carving up experience. They're not supposed to be
absolute or
> objectively true or any such thing. But they do have to be coherent
and
> consistent with the MOQ as a whole and I think that expanding the
definition
> of the social to include the non-human world is destructive of that
coherence
> and consistency. If cells counted as social, for example, we might
expect
> intellect to emerge from a cell and it otherwise makes the system
fairly
> ridiculous.
Regarding metaphysical relevance, I explain what I mean with that term
in the
"Discreteness" section of the essay if you're interested.
Regarding "ridiculous", I thought that a metaphysical system that
claimed to be
discrete and dependent, but at closer examination turned out not to
fulfill any
of those, was rather ridiculous. And there's where the essay starts. I
claim
that if you really want to make it discrete and dependent, the result is
the
levels I describe in the essay.
Magnus
Ron:
Dmb, Magnus,
I asked this question to see what members would say,
Krimel brought up that he took Pirsigs description
of discrete levels quite seriously and that the general
consensus was that this was also taken seriously
by the status quo.
I believe the term was "MoQ heresy" to suggest otherwise.
dis*crete
-adjective 1. apart or detached from others; separate; distinct: six
discrete parts.
2. consisting of or characterized by distinct or individual parts;
discontinuous.
3. Mathematics. a. (of a topology or topological space) having the
property that every subset is an open set.
b. defined only for an isolated set of points: a discrete variable.
c. using only arithmetic and algebra; not involving calculus: discrete
methods.
The question is, in what way did Pirsig intend the term to mean in
reference
to the level system?
The term discrete -Synonyms 1. different, individual, unconnected.
This doesn't seem to coincide with the description in the Turner letter,
but, when I explored the mathematical term and it's reference to
topology and "topological space", things began to parallel in meaning.
In other words what is discrete is the MoQ taxonomy. Not any entity
or pattern "in itself".
Topological space is an area in which patterns of type operate in.
The patterns or sets are continuous but the space of likeness
they operate within is discrete. Therefore tiny variables may
gather to influence or emerge into other discrete topological spaces.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topological_space
Discrete in this context refers to categories of taxonomy.
not to patterns of value themselves.
It is value which creates taxonomic meaning
therefore human taxonomic structures are
reflecting human values.
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/
