On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 8:30 PM, John Carl <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 4:59 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Joe, > > > > On 18 Aug 2010 at 13:56, Joseph Maurer wrote: > > > > The thing that makes humans unique is the ability to process DQ in an > > evolutionary way. > > > > [P] > > Agree. > > > > [J] > > The first self-reflective faculty of this capability is > > the Emotions. Emotions are unique in that they are DQ only. Love is DQ > > and > > only described by analogy. > > > > [P] > > "The MOQ sees emotions as a biological response to quality and not the > same > > thing as quality. There are many cases, particularly in economic > activity > > where values occur without any emotion." (LC, NOte 141) > > > > > [JC] > > Bullshit. ouch. > > Emotions are social responses. Lizards and amoebas are biological, but > they emote not. > Bull yourself. What do you think activates lizards and amoebas, intellect? > > > [J] > > I have no idea how to describe a social level in > > terms of DQ/SQ. > > > > > [JC] > > Intellectual understand is DQ to a social pattern. SQ is any stable, > long-lasting society or group. > Say what? > > > [P] > > SQ at the social level is the Giant. DQ is accessible at this level so > long > > as > > SOL, with its absence of the concept of DQ, doesn't to try guide the > Giant. > > > > [JC] > > Poppycock (a polite term for "bullshit that doesn't get me bonked by Lu) > > SOL says intellect is SOM, RMP says upper levels are DQ to lower. Your > statement, Platt, makes no sense. > Check what Pirsig says about the Giant and intellectually guided societies. > > > > [J] > > Intellect is defined as SOL (thanks BO) DQ/SQ. > > > > [JC] > > DQ to intellect is romantically perceived, dynamically generated > realization. Logos born of mythos. Certainly not the other way around > > [J] > > > > Higher > > emotional and higher intellectual levels are also DQ only, the purview of > > heroes. > > > > > > [JC] > > Come down from your heavenly choirs, Joe. There are no heroes. > > > > [P} > > DQ is the purview of all who pursue the Conceptually Unknown in order "to > > bring something out of that unknown into a static form that would be of > > value > > to everyone." (SODV) I agree such individuals are heroes. > > > > Regards, > > Platt > > > > > [jc] > > Well... I guess I'll have to take your word for it Platt, You are older > than me. But I never seen such a thing in all MY experience. > Sorry about that. > [jc] > I mean for starters, wtf is "Conceptually Unknown" and if you know it, > doesn't that obviate it's label? > > If you knew what it was you wouldn't call it unknown would you? . 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
