Steve, Marsha mentioned: I don't ascribe to the view that you attribute to me. I don't see "code of art" as a level or emerging level. It is instead the particular patterning "thing" and the levels are the static patterns left in its wake. That is, intellectual patterns such as philosophical systems, are mediated and created by an intellect. The intellectual patterns (metaphysics) of the 4th level are mediated by intellect. Seems obvious, eh? But that's how I ascribe intellect as the code of art and static metaphysical systems as making up the content of the 4th level.
Working down the chain, and just off the top of my head, the code of art for society is emotion, the code of art for biology is the law known as "survival of the fittest" and the code of art for the inorganic are the mechanistic laws of cause and effect. > On the other hand, for patterns to evolve they have to orginate as > unpatterned responses to dynamic quality which later become habits or > patterned behaviors. I don't know what is meant by "unpatterned responses". In fact, the term "un"patterned gives me gas. It sounds suspiciously like phlogoston to me, something postulated in order to fit a pre-formed view, with no empirical evidence supporting it whatsoever. If you said, "pre-patterned" with the implication that the human valuing agent (nod to Ham) is going to be doing some patterning in the near future, I'd have an idea what you meant. But as it is..... But either way you want to think of it, the "code of art" is equated > with Dynamic morality and is about dynamic-static tension in general > rather than a new or existing specific type of static pattern of > value. > > yeah, that's the way I want to think of it. > "First, there were moral codes that established the supremacy of biological > life over inanimate nature. Second, there were moral codes that > established the supremacy of the social order over biological > life-conventional morals-proscriptions against drugs, murder, adultery, > theft and the like. Note to Marsha: Dogs and humans steal. Lizards and amoeba do not. Social morality is evident in non-human mammals. If you don't see that, you're trying to get your puzzle pieces to fit by hammering on them hard to fit the picture you want to see, not the one that is there. But I guess that's ok since everything is only relative. :) John the bah-humbuggerer 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/
