Hi Andre
On 2010-08-22 21:33, Andre Broersen wrote:
Magnus:
According to you, it seems I can only experience inorganic and
biological events. But that's just not true. I can experience social and
intellectual events as well.
Andre
I am going to blow this up a bit Magnus, if you do not mind, because I
have noticed this over and over again with interpretations that have
nothing to do with the MOQ and everything to do with the idea of trying
to 'frame' someone for 'trapping' someone into a particular way of
reduction.
Of course you experience social and intellectual events! I thought we
are talking MOQ stuff here and not 'tripping eachother up' in SOM land..
I wasn't trying to trap you in SOM land, I did try to to show an
inconsistency in your point of view of the MoQ though.
And, I don't know, isn't that what we usually try to do here? Perhaps
not "trap" eachother, but at least try to show inconsistencies in the
other's reasoning when different opinions surface?
Magnus (previously):
Anthony has mistaken the int-soc border with the soc-bio border.It isthe
social value that makes ants carry all that food and other stuff to the
hill, if each ant was ruled by its biological values, he would run off
and care only for himself.
Andre (previously) in response: With all due respect it seems you have a
very narrow idea about
biological patterns of value.
Magnus: Why's that? Do you think:
Andre:
No I do not for one minute think that: 'since Magnus thinks...' I get
the impression that since cooperation and caring behaviours are
displayed at the organic level that YOU think they are social quality
displays. I am simply pointing out that they belong to the organic
level. The social level may have copied and imitated some of those
values because they were regarded as useful but they do belong at the
organic level, from an organic point of view.
I disagree, inheritance is simply the biological process used by the
social level. Just as all higher levels are using lower levels for its
own purposes.
I think you're confusing the biological reproduction process with the
biological/organic level. They are not identical.
Magnus:
And what is the meaning of reality? Not sure that's a "meaningful"
question.
Andre:
It is as meaningful as saying:'42'. It is not this, not that'. The
question of 'meaning' immediately drives us into the intellectual level
and that,will give us only provisional answers. ( think of the Buddhist
concept of 'suffering'...Gautama was no fool).
I didn't get much of that. As meaningful as '42'? Not meaningful at all
you mean?
But I agree it drives us into the intellectual level, but then we have
already split up the reality into DQ/SQ and the levels.
Magnus:
And I provided just one of the contradictions that doesn't work in my
last post, but I see you conveniently failed to include that (the 1, 2,
3 chain of reasoning). May I ask why?
Andre:
Your 1,2,3, chain of reasoning to which I 'failed' to respond:
Here they come:
1. The MoQ is an intellectual pattern, right? Even Pirsig has said that
when confronted with one of Bo's ideas.
Andre:
I do not think that Pirsig felt 'confronted' by Bo. The MOQ IS an
intellectual POV. Bodvar felt unsupported and let down by Mr. Pirsig
himself because Bo's interpretation of the quality thing was different
to Pirsig's Quality thing.
2. You, me, Horse and most others here on MD can remember large parts of
the MoQ in our heads. We don't go and open the book every time we want
to check something.
Andre:
Most definately, it must be somewhere...reinvented every day...I am sure
the in(organic) PATTERNS that we call 'brains' have something to do with
this.
Reinvented every day?
To me, the very purpose of *static* patterns are that they have an
ability to stay static from one moment to the next. That goes for all
types of value, not just inorganic and organic.
So, no, I disagree very much that the intellectual patterns you have
acquired throughout your life, all your memories, are reinvented when
you need them. Or perhaps you use the word reinvented instead of
recalled from storage?
3. 2. Implies that you, me, Horse and most others on MD are capable of
supporting intellectual patterns.
Andre:
Not sure what you mean by 'supporting'. Let's say that we have the
capacity to 'tune-in' to those waves that we are talking about. Perhaps
that may be a fruitful way of doing this: the 'brain' is the
particle/wave converter of sounds, vision, taste, feeling, smell... into
concepts, ideas etc , etc. all of which are accessible and retrievable
within the static domain. It is an intellectual way of experiencing?
I don't see it that way at all. It sounds as if all knowledge, yours and
mine and everyone else's, are buzzing around in the ether for anyone to
listen to? Or perhaps each person's knowledge is encrypted using a
private PGP key?
I'd like to summon Occam's razor in this case, which explanation is the
simplest? That everyone stores personal information in his/her brain, or
that all info floats around everywhere and only one person may access it?
Magnus:
To me, it only reinforces my view that intellectual patterns are stored
using the language of his brain. The language of his brain may be
slightly different from others, but since he's dead, the language, and
with it, also the contents are gone.
Andre:
This I find incomprehensible. '...stored using the language of his
brain'?? The brain, as an in(organic) pattern of value does not store
anything Magnus. The pattern performs a function, neither of the two are
'it', an 'entity'. All is a continuous flow... brilliant!
It's a continuous flow, yes, but of quality events. And not just organic
and inorganic, but also social and intellectual. And I'm pretty sure the
brain stores quite a large chunk of info. I've explained the language
part enough times in this thread already. Just re-read.
Magnus
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
