re Hi , Arlo. What is asked for, another level, a superawarenesslevel,an intelligence level is probably all a disguisemantle for a "undividual level" Its like asking for the vault's combination in fact. Adrie
2010/12/7 118 <[email protected]> > Hi Arlo, > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Arlo Bensinger <[email protected]> wrote: > > [Mark] > > I don't think we need to see it as an endless paradox. We can assume > both > > structures are looking at each other. > > > > [Arlo] > > I assume here you mean a MOQ and "SOL" are structures looking at each > other. > > Are there other structures? Or just these two. > > [Mark] > Yes, there are many ways to construct reality. Spooky isn't it? But > in this case I would say that MOQ is looking at Western Philosophy as > discussed by Pirsig. We can state that one has higher Quality than > the other if we want, and it creates meaning for us. > > > > > > Still waiting to here if this new structure is DQ or SQ or some other new > > non-SQ/non-DQ type of whatever. > > [Mark] > For me it is not some other new one, I am happy with Quality. > > > > [Mark] > > This top down approach is not necessary in MOQ in my opinion, it can be > SSL > > (subject subject), or OOL (object object). > > > > [Arlo] > > So where do you place a MOQ then? As an intellectual pattern (along with > > Pirsig) or as a superordinate fifth-level above intellect (along with the > > SOLists)? Or somewhere else entirely? > > [Mark] > I am in harmony with the analogy of the intellectual level as being > something which can be separated. I would place the analogy of MOQ > there. There may be a fifth level if we want to create one. Are you > interested in doing so? I would participate. > > > > Personally, I continue to be amazed that recursion scares so many people, > > but I am convinced it does so because they are trapped in an SOL world. > They > > are still looking for a logically flawless, complete system to describe > > everything, and "all this is just an analogy" continues to elude them. As > > Goedel and others have show, the more powerful the symbolic system is, > the > > more useful it becomes, but also the more unavoidably recursive and > > paradoxical it becomes. You can't have it both ways. Me, I prefer the > > beautiful paradox and elegant recursions pointed to so well in > Margritte's > > The False Mirror. > > [Mark] > Yes, I agree with you. We are all trying to find some kind of Truth, > when all we do is create it. How can there be endless regression in a > creation? It grows outward, not inward. I am a fan of Goedel. > > > > > > > > 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 > -- parser 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
