HI Dan, I always enjoy reading your posts, and I wish I had the privilege more often. I do not know anything about the BOC, but have enjoyed reading texts about Eastern philosophy (Buddhism's emptiness).
Marsha On Aug 12, 2010, at 12:45 AM, Dan Glover wrote: > Hello everyone > > I've been away working in the dirt and despite other intentions > thinking quite a bit. Reading over them, these thoughts seem a bit > jumbled but I want to try and get them down while they seem fresh in > my mind. Please forgive any inconsistencies; this is a very rough > draft. > > Khoo, in a recent post, mentions the potential value of marrying East > and West when it comes to philosophy. I agree; so let's in an effort > to clarify both the MOQ and the Book of Changes compare both > documents: > > The language of the Book of Changes (BOC) is a method of > differentiation, as is the language of the MOQ. Any method of > differentiation can be seen as a process where the point is to define > a particular "something" amongst many. This process acts to zoom in on > a "something," to isolate it, and zoom in further to acquire details > where the details themselves become "somethings." > > This process reflects the use of recursion, where, as the process > concentrates focus on a something, it differentiates within the > previously differentiated and so on, and from there identifies the > contents of that something until all elements, all parts, of the > something have been clearly defined and in doing so has that > something, as a whole, been identified. > > "In this plain of understanding static patterns of value are divided > into four systems: inorganic patterns, biological patterns, social > patterns and intellectual patterns. They are exhaustive. That's all > there are. If you construct an encyclopedia of four topics-Inorganic, > Biological, Social and Intellectual-nothing is left out. No "thing," > that is. Only Dynamic Quality, which cannot be described in any > encyclopedia, is absent." [LILA] > > The MOQ states that reality can be sorted into four evolutionary > levels. That's all there is. The BOC, on the other hand, uses 64 > hexagrams to describe reality. Since we cannot possibly map "all there > is" in a 1:1 format, the BOC as well as the MOQ must predominately use > analogy and metaphor to describe "all there is." The MOQ is a map that > describes the territory. It is not the territory itself. How could it > be? Reality shifts and changes constantly. As soon as we nail it down, > poof, it is gone. > > Looking to the four levels of the MOQ, it seems that as we move from > the lower levels to the upper we move from the general to the > particular. Just as every biological pattern of value is also an > inorganic pattern but not all inorganic patterns are biological, every > social pattern is an intellectual pattern but not all intellectual > patterns are social. The hallmark of intellect is discrimination. This > discrimination applies to the hexagrams in the BOC as well. Starting > at the baseline, all four levels of the MOQ can be seen within each > hexagram. > > Each hexagram of the BOC can be seen as complete in itself yet in the > language of the BOC, each hexagram is entangled within the context of > all other hexagrams. In the language of the MOQ, each level is > entangled within the context of all other levels to make up the whole. > Each level will contribute an expressiveness to any other level. And > that expressiveness is only describable by analogy to the > characteristics of some other level. Since, like the BOC, the MOQ is > supposed to contain "all there is" it should be able to include > itself. I'd like to take some time and explore how it does that, as > well as how we can define a level through the association of all other > levels. > > "This classification of patterns is not very original, but the > Metaphysics of Quality allows an assertion about them that is unusual. > It says they are not continuous. They are discrete. They have very > little to do with one another. Although each higher level is built on > a lower one it is not an extension of that lower level. Quite the > contrary. The higher level can often be seen to be in opposition to > the lower level, dominating it, controlling it where possible for its > own purposes." [LILA] > > In the language of the MOQ, each successive level can be seen as in > opposition to the lower. This gives us two semantic poles to a level's > definition. This duality of opposition runs within each level as well > as in between each level. For example, starting with the inorganic > level as a base line, we transition into biological patterns of value > that take inorganic patterns and usurp them to their own purposes. > > Transitioning to social patterns of value, we see how biological > patterns are usurped and used by the Giant for its own purposes... we > only have to think of the human resource department at any > corporation. In addition, within the social level, religions have > played a major role in in the advancement of science (which is nothing > but the obliteration of the old ways) as well as in never-ending war > and bigotry. > > And finally, intellectual patterns value freedom from any social > constraints. But there's discord within the intellectual level too. > For instance, subject/object metaphysics is seen as a high quality > system of pattern of value. SOM proposes that reality is composed of > subjects and objects. Period. > > But the MOQ opposes it in that SOM presupposes value lies in either > the subject or the object, or both, since subjects and objects are all > there is. The MOQ states that subjects and objects arise from Quality, > not the other way around. In the MOQ, reality is composed of patterns > of value rather than subjects and objects. > "But although the four systems are exhaustive they are not exclusive. > They all operate at the same time and in ways that are almost > independent of each other." [LILA] > > Each level is a representation, or a set, of qualities. Each level > represents a quality extracted from the duality of opposition. In one > sense, we might look at the MOQ as an exponentiation reflecting the > application of an opposing set of relationships within each level, > with each level embedded within a context set by the previous. In > building our understanding of reality in this manner, we move from the > general to the particular. This is but half the story though, if we > include a focus on going "down" once we reach the top of the MOQ > hierarchy. > > Due to the manner in which the hexagrams of the BOC are formed, each > is in fact made up of its own nature plus the input of all other > levels. And in the MOQ, when we focus on any one level, what is > reflected is the influence of context on the expression of some > archetype through that context. In other words, we can consider each > level like a hexagram, as having a spectrum made up of influences from > all other levels, seen through the context of the level under > consideration. It seems plausible to consider that this Dynamic > differentiation is how the MOQ includes an expression of itself within > itself, as does the BOC. A book contains itself, of course. > > "So what the Metaphysics of Quality concludes is that all schools are > right on the mind-matter question. Mind is contained in static > inorganic patterns. Matter is contained in static intellectual > patterns. Both mind and matter are completely separate evolutionary > levels of static patterns of value, and as such are capable of each > containing the other without contradiction.' [LILA] > > Matter starts as an idea, a static intellectual pattern of value. An > idea starts in the mind, a static inorganic pattern of value. These > separate evolutionary levels define each other by their opposition. > Looking to the BOC, each hexagram is constructed of bits of > information encoded in lines representing complementary features of > reality. Each hexagram is an idea that defines itself through the > opposition of other hexagrams as well as the lines themselves. > > Tired now, > > Thanks for reading, > > Dan > 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/md/archives.html ___ 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/md/archives.html
