Hi Joe, I do not quite understand your analogy of division by 0
When one divides by 0 he is asking how many nothings make up a something. It is not a restricted mathematical manipulation, or some indeterminate, it is just a nonsensical question. However, if what I say is true, then what is "nothingness" for indeed that is something. Nothingness therefore can evolve. For this, I would say that Nothingness evolves into something. The reverse is also true. In this way Quality, which comes from nothingness, can indeed appear in the form of morality. The question is then, does nothingness have any force before it becomes something, or is there an additional force beyond that which we now call Evolution? Is Quality evolution, or is evolution Quality? Cheers, Willblake2 On Aug 6, 2009, at 3:16:20 PM, "Joseph Maurer" <[email protected]> wrote: From: "Joseph Maurer" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [MD] The case for an Uncreated Source Date: August 6, 2009 3:16:20 PM PDT To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> On 8/4/09 11:27 PM, "Ham Priday" <[email protected]> wrote: [Ham] Did you mean to say that "the direction of evolution is morality"? If that's what you meant, and it seems to be what Pirsig is saying, then you have a different concept of morality than I do. For me, morality requires human judgment. It's society's convention for acceptable behavior based on the value-sensibility of its individual members. Without a sensible agent, there would be no realization of morality or value. Hi Ham and all, [Joe] Imho yes, evolution is a logical basis for morality. Philosophers agreed that something existed, since they exist. How does free will fit into that schematic? Pirsig¹s first slice of the metaphysical knife is DQ/SQ. There is something in our awareness that is not defined. He called it DQ. There is no compulsion from accepted meaning to choose the undefined. Through analogy or metaphor there is no compulsion to not choose the undefined. I am free to choose. I will examine undefined DQ very carefully through metaphor and analogy before I choose. [Joe] In an age of emphasis on mathematical logic the subjective as undefined has restricted mathematical manipulations. I can¹t divide by 0 since the result is indeterminate. DQ is undefined and becomes 0 by default for modern mathematicians. According to MOQ I experience the undefined in evolution. This is indeterminate in mathematical computations. I find myself at a loss for words since there is no word for the undefined. If only the objective is true, division by 0, the undefined, is indeterminate, undefined. The error of trying to use objective logic for the indeterminate creates a denial for logic of the undefined. [Joe] In your ontogeny you avoid division by 0 by creating an indeterminate knowledge of an uncreated essence. No division! I argue that I can have no direct experience of an uncreated essence. It is beyond my present level of evolution. There is a hint that further individual evolution has occurred. There are heroes! [Joe] In the mathematical description of evolution the indeterminate of division by 0 necessitates manipulations in logic to insure that any division by 0, like evolution, is cancelled by its opposite before any conclusion can be reached. Evolution for an undefined subject is denied, only the object changes. MOQ logic correctly defines the subject in SOL. [Joe] I do not know how to explain, mathematically, levels in existence. I have no calculus. The absolute is denied. Undefined DQ is dogma. In mathematical logic I deny definition for a metaphysically evolving hierarchy of levels. Might makes right. [Joe] How does the individual evolve morally? The individual is aware of who he/she is. Etc. Joe > Did you mean to say that "the direction of evolution is morality"? If > that's what you meant, and it seems to be what Pirsig is saying, then you > have a different concept of morality than I do. For me, morality requires > human judgment. It's society's convention for acceptable behavior based on > the value-sensibility of its individual members. Without a sensible agent, > there would be no realization of morality or value. 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/ 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/
