>woods previously:
> I'm going to try to go through this slowly so I don't get
>mixed up.
> First, are you talking about the patterns of inorganic, biological,
>social, and intellectual here or are you talking about the intellectual
>patterns in which categorized inorganic, biological, social, and
>intellectual? I see a difference.
Marsha:
The first type, patterns. The static pattern of value that is
tree. Or the static pattern of value that is Socialism. I am
talking about the patterns, the static patterns of value.
woods:
ok.
Marsha previously:
>The value that the static pattern of value represents is not a
>tree.
>woods previously:
> I really don't get this last sentence. A tree is not an
> organic spov? Is that what your saying?
Marsha:
The static pattern of value that represents tree is what humans
overlay onto the direct experience.
woods:
I see what you're saying here as a two step process. First,
spov called tree. Second, "...humans overlay...".
The last part, "...onto the direct experience...", not sure? Onto
the direct experience of humans? or trees?
Marsha:
That spov would include all that one knows about trees and
all past experiences of trees.
woods:
Ok. This would indicate a blend of intellectual spov's with "knows about"
and "...all past experiences of trees..." and thus blended with organic spov's.
As we both know, the step between that helps intellectual spov's understand
organic spov's is social spov's. I'm pointing out this last sentence so
we don't get off track, because we both know this part of the process.
Marsha:
Nature doesn't name, visualize or define trees. The eye and seeing
mechanism doesn't name or define trees. The mind does.
woods:
I agree. This process is the intellectual spov. The tree has its' process
called organic spov.
Marsha:
The spov is overlayed onto the experience. It is not the direct experience.
woods:
Which spov?
Marsha:
The tree-static-pattern-of-value is categorized as organic and
therefore goes into the Organic/Biological Level.
woods:
Yes. The tree spov is categorized (intellectual spov) as organic and
thus we may understand tree spov is not intellectual spov, but is organic
spov.
>woods previously:
> It is for human convenience that we assign an intellectual spov
> of a tree, but the biological spov tree remains.
Marsha:
At the moment I am staying away from Intellectual spovs. For me,
it's best to start with the most simple. That would be the first two
levels. Okay? And the first two levels have as their referent
external, natural phenomenon, such as what you are calling tree, or
as I might be calling granite.
woods:
Ok.
>woods previously:
> I don't think value is only emotion. I thought value had four
> levels. Inorganic, organic, social, and intellectual and then
> dynamic value and then another called value (or quality).
> I don't think pure direct experience is narrowed into senses
> and emotion/feeling only. Those are biological spov's. I
> thought direct experience was value, thus, the direct experience
>of each level is present. Each spov of each level has their own
>direct experience.
Marsha:
A pattern seems to have an emotional aspect, sometimes strong,
sometimes subtle.
woods:
Not sure what you mean. I can definitely see that any pattern does
have an emotional aspect when biological. Social and intellectual spov's
have this emotional aspect too when they overlay biological spov's. Not
sure what emotional spov's are completely though. Emotional patterns
might be inorganic spov's generating what we intellectually overlay as
emotional patterns, so, emotional patterns might not begin as organic
spov's, but actually might be inorganic spov.
Marsha:
SA, I am investigating the nature of individual patterns such as
tree. Of course, it can get very, very complicated, especially since
I think everything is ever-changing, interrelated and overlapping. I
am curious... I am curious about simple spovs such as tree or
granite. Curious to see what it might add to my understanding of the
MOQ, what it might add to my understanding of the Intellectual
Level. Just wanting to investigate where it might lead. I am not
wanting to make anything static, just to look to see what might be
there to assist understanding.
woods:
I'm all for that. I think this is going very well.
> woods previously:
> Not a nutcase. Searching through we both are. These static
> patterns that you are referring to here are organic spov's. I wouldn't
> say just "Static patterns".
Marsha:
Yes, you are right. I'm talking about simple patterns first. But I
know for a fact that I can be in love with a logical idea such as
Nagarjuna's use of tetralemma, and love is an emotion.
My most basic question at the moment is: Are all patterns across all
levels primarily conceptual? My answer, at the moment, seems to be
YES, but I strongly suspect there is also an emotional aspect.
woods:
I would differ. I don't find "all patterns across all levels primarily
conceptual".
I find some patterns to be social, organic, and inorganic.
I think what's difficult about answering this, is, a chicken and egg type
questioning maybe. Does value begin in intellectual spov's and then we can
only categorize, thus intellectually overlay these other levels? Or, which I'm
inclined to agree with at the moment, is each of these other levels are
values unto themselves and we may intellectually wake up or realize them.
Therefore the non-intellectual spov's (inorganic, organic, and social spov's)
can
wake up intellectual spov's. And then intellectual spov's can further
investigate
these other non-intellectual spov's and it becomes a circular process.
Marsha:
And there is the question what does 'conceptual' cover? It not a
page from an encyclopedia.
woods:
ok. Conceptual is intellectual spov only right? The categorizing and
categories inorganic, organic, and social and even intellectual spov's
are conceptualized, but these other non-intellectual spov's are still
going to be here valuing even if we don't conceptualize them. Intellectual
spov's need self-reflected as well, conceptualized, and identified upon
self-reflection or else even intellectual spov's will be valuing without
identification also.
This is a good discussion Marsha.
woods
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
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/
