On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 11:06 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > [John] >> the underlying matrix of > understanding is formed by the common experience of a common environment. > > "If language is to be a means of communication there must be agreement not > only in > definitions but also (queer as this may sound) in judgements." > (Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, 242.) > > http://people.su.se/~kgl/Wittgenstein%20and%20Davidson.pdf > > [Mark] >> I think that there is fallacy in considering the societal level to be >> the sum of individual levels. > > Very good. Otherwise, bee society would be on the MoQ 3rd level.
[Mark] Well, yes, indeed, bee society is on the 3rd level. Or is it only humans that can create a 3rd level? I do not think that humans have a patent on this. > > [Mark} >> As individuals we exist in the biological level (or organic, whatever). > > IMHO all 4 levels are integrated in a human individual. [Mark] That is not my understanding. A single human cannot be a societal or an intellectual level. Such things are outside and have purposes of their own. We can, however, surmise that such levels exist. What you describe as the individual lies at the biological level. Not above not below. That is not to say that they do not represent similar properties, for that they do. They all represent equal apparitions of Quality. This is how we can ascribe Quality (or Morality) to the universe in general. I believe this is discussed in Lila. > > [Mark] >> A collection of individuals synergistically form the societal level which >> goes by its own >> consciousness. This is similar to the cells making up our consciousness. >> As such, we are speaking of group consciousness, not individual desires all >> summed >> up and fought over in a political way. Such values are not within the >> domain of the >> individual, although he does provide basis for them, in the same way our >> cells >> provides the basis for our consciousness. > > IMHO this analogy obscures more than it enlightens. It would be like saying > a lion moves > thru the savanna just like a bishop moves around a chessboard. The kind of > mistake > the lion could make (e.g., falling in a tar pit or scaring off its prey) is > of a different kind than > a bishop could make (e.g., by moving off its diagonal). > It is not clear how individual brain cells create consciousness (the "hard > problem" of > consciousness), but it isn't the way individuals create "group > consciousness". The analogy was not meant to obscure, it was meant to depict the jumps between levels. Cells exist as self-serving conscious entities. They have no idea concerning our human consciousness. In the same way, we have no idea what the societal or intellectual consciousness is knowing. We derive such levels by interpolation. Going from the inorganic to the biological is one such leap. Within the biological itself there are levels, one being represented by our individual consciousness. It is this form of encompassing of levels that provides understanding of each. The intellectual level has a purpose of its own and we are as incapable of understanding it, as the intellectual level is incapable at understanding us. These are true levels, not just extensions of the human mind. The intention that a human can have is identical in aspects to an intention that a photon can have. This is the embodiment of Quality. There is no need to resort to anthropocentrism for MoQ to be valid. This is one of the pitfalls that Ham runs into when claiming that man rules the earth. Such notions also result from anthropocentric Darwinism, and it is mistakenly applied to everything from the big bang, to the evolution of the mind. The part that cells play in creating human consciousness is identical, in MoQ aspects, to the part humans play in creating societies. It is very easy to draw a one to one relationship, using simple parameters such as communication, structure, identity, specialization, and so forth. Cells will endure destruction for the body to live, we see the same thing happening in the military. Selfless devotion to a greater power. There is nothing distinct about the human condition, except that this is where we exist. I guess that is pretty special, at least to us, but not unusual. All in my opinion, of course. Mark > 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
