Hello Ron.
7 Nov. you wrote:
> I had said:
> > MoQ is a thought, a theory about reality, is it not?
> Bo states:
> Whoa! Here is the crux. The MOQ rejects the subject/object distinction
> - of which "thought/reality" is a sub-set - and introduces the
> Dynamic/Static (Quality) distinction as existences fundament. Ergo
> there are no thoughts as different from reality in the MOQ. All S/Os
> are relegated to its 4th. leve ... IMO
> > therefore it is a static conception.
> No, the DQ/SQ distinction is the MOQ itself and cant fit into one of
> its own lesser parts (the container logic)
> Ron:
> The Self referential logical statements you are referring to apply to
> a allopoietic systems of thought or SOM. MoQ is based on An
> autopoietic system. "a self-referential situation is the one of
> autopoiesis, as the logical organization produces itself the structure
> which creates itself.
We are in the strange situation that you seemingly defend LILA
regarding the MOQ as an intellectual pattern (a subjective "menu"
about Q-reality "out there"). While I defend ZAMM's
And finally: Phædrus, following a path that to his knowledge
had never been taken before in the history of Western thought,
went straight between the horns of the subjectivity-objectivity
dilemma and said Quality is neither a part of mind, nor is it a
part of matter. It is a third entity which is independent of the
two.
"Neither part of mind ..." means just what I said; in the MOQ the
mind/matter, subject/object or any derivatives thereof are abolished,
this aggregate is relegated the role of its 4th. level. Thus saying that
the MOQ is a thought has no relevance inside the MOQ.
> In classical SOM metaphysics, self-reference is subjectivity, while
> "hetero-reference", as it is called is objectivity."-wiki
Elementary.
> Consequently Bo, when one rationalizes with classical intellect, SOM,
> one will run into this paradox and the need for meta-levels.
Yes, Phaedrus was immersed in SOM and had to start from its
premises and in this sense the MOQ is "out of" SOM or "out of"
intellect because - as you say - intellect=SOM. However there is a
turning inside-out of the metaphysical sock when Phaedrus postulates
that SOM is "out of" Quality" (and the former called "intellect")
> From the persective of SOM, MoQ IS a logical meta-level as far as the
> classical formation of logical systems goes.
You alternate between the most apt considerations and nonsense.
>From the perspective of SOM (intellect) the MOQ is another
metaphysics in the classical Aristotelian sense "a theory about reality"
and will remain there till kingdom comes.
> Alas, MoQ is no classical logical system
The MOQ it surely is no subject/object system, but every bit as logical.
> and as seen from the MoQ perspective, SOM and MoQ are one of many menus
> in an autopoietic logical system. As Pirsig stated, it takes MoQ off
> the logical chess board by challenging the very chess board, pieces and
> rules, the very fabric of the game.
As said LILA may say that the MOQ is another "menu"*) but Phaedrus
of ZAMM said that the menu/reality duality is S/O and part of
"intellect"'s repertoire. The MOQ isn't removed from the logical
chessboard (that wouldn't be more that a childish tantrum) after
pointing out the paradoxes of the S/O premises it shows that its
DQ/SQ premises dissolves the said paradoxes-platypis
> Thus those who speak in this sort of logical expression are interpreted
> by classical logic as paradoxal for this method uses self refferential
> statements.
Are you (in your newfangled academical style) saying that the MOQ
seen from SOM looks like a subjective "theory"? In that case no
wonder because almost all participants of this forum promotes that
view. I.e. they haven't moved one iota out of SOM.
Regrettably
Bo
*)PS
The menu/reality issue is related to the map/terrain one, but this post
is too long to delve into that.
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/
