Bodvar,
After searching all through "Lila's child", I could not find the quote you
claim RMP
to have said:""... I fully agree with Bo's insight that the SOM and the
intellectual level are one and the same. To support it , to protect it, to
avoid losing it and sinking back to "anything goes" irrationalism or a
"because God says so" mentality ...and ends with saying "..To that
end the MOQ is the best S/O answer I've found yet."
you say it lies in (page 396 in Lila's Child)
what I have found:
The MOQ does not deny the traditional scientific view of reality as composed of
material
substance and independent of us. It says it is an extremely high quality idea.
We should
follow it whenever it is practical to do so. But the MOQ, like philosophic
idealism, says
this scientific view of reality is still an idea. If it were not an idea, then
that “independent
scientific material reality” would not be able to change as new scientific
discoveries
come in.
RMP Annotation 25This is okay. In
who is up to reading
MOQ precision, let’s say that the intellectual level is the same as mind. It is
the collection
and manipulation of symbols, created in the brain, that stand for patterns of
experience.
RMP:Anders is slipping into the materialist assumption that there is a huge
world out there that
has nothing to do with people. The MOQ says that is a high quality assumption,
within
limits. One of its limits is that without humans to make it that assumption
cannot be
made. It is a human specific assumption. Strictly speaking, Anders has never
heard of or
ever will hear of anything that isn’t human specific.DG:So I take it
philosophic idealism is a higher quality intellectual idea in this situation vs.
the physicist working in the lab who would find materialism to be of higher
value?RMP:That sounds right, although modern physics has produced laboratory
paradoxes for
materialists that do not exist for idealists. I think it is best to understand
both systems, and
shift from one to another as it becomes valuable to do so.
RMP Annotation 86Since in the MOQ all divisions of Quality are static, it
follows that high and low are
subdivisions of static quality. “Static” and “Dynamic” are also subdivisions of
static
quality, since the MOQ is itself a static intellectual pattern of Quality.
RMP Annotation 97Within the MOQ, the
considered to be a good
MOQ, like science, starts with human experience. Remember the early talk in ZMM
about Newton’s Law of Gravity? Scientific laws without people to write them are
a
scientific impossibility.
RMP:In the late 1800’s the chicken-and-egg argument about whether ideas
precede inorganic
nature or inorganic nature precedes ideas was considered philosophically
important. No
one to my knowledge has ever shown that the idealists who considered ideas to
come first
have been wrong. The discussion has since died away.
It is important for an understanding of the MOQ to see that although “common
sense”
dictates that inorganic nature came first, actually “common sense” which is a
set of ideas,
has to come first. This “common sense” is arrived at through a huge web of
socially
approved evaluations of various alternatives. The key term here is
“evaluation,” i.e.,
quality decisions. The fundamental reality is not the common sense or the
objects and
laws approved of by common sense but the approval itself and the quality that
leads to it.
RMP Annotation 132It employs SOM reasoning the way SOM reasoning employs
social structures such as
courts and journals and learned societies to make itself known. SOM reasoning
is not
subordinate to these social structures, and the MOQ is not subordinate to the
SOM
structures it employs. Remember that the central reality of the MOQ is not an
object or a
subject or anything else. It is understood by direct experience only and not by
reasoning
of any kind. Therefore to say that the MOQ is based on SOM reasoning is as
useful as
saying that the Ten Commandments are based on SOM reasoning. It doesn’t tell us
anything about the essence of the Ten Commandments and it doesn’t tell us
anything
about the essence of the MOQ.
95. I don’t remember not responding, so it must have been an oversight. I
don’t think the
subject-object level is identical with intellect. Intellect is simply thinking,
and one can
think without involving the subject-object relationship. Computer language is
not
primarily structured into subjects and objects. Algebra has no subjects and
objects.idea that static patterns of value start with the inorganic level
isidea. But the MOQ itself doesn’t start before sentience. TheLila, I never
defined the intellectual level of the MOQ, since everyoneLila already knows
what “intellectual” means. For purposes of
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/
