Hey, Joe --
[Ham]:
Unless the time sequence is irrelevant in your ontology
(interpretation), the chronology you've laid out is as follows:
1) Substance is modified by an "accident" called Quality.
Joe:
This is my understanding of SOM in which only Substance
has real existence, everything else is a modifier (accident
which receives its existence from the substance).
Then I don't understand what you call SOM, Joe. After all, it doesn't stand
for Substance of Metaphysics. Where are the subjects and objects, and what
are they made of? (To me they're 'existents', the objects made of matter,
the subjects made of some non-material substance.) It was my understanding
that subject-object metaphysics is the common or universal concept of
reality in which existence starts with the Big Bang, energizes atomic
particles to form finite entities, and proceeds through the process of
evolution to create an ordered, self-subsistent system that eventually gives
rise to biological life forms. The only "modifier" in this process is the
law of natural selection, unless one believes in a "supernatural designer".
[Ham]:.
2) Repetition of this accident thoughout existence creates
several levels of Quality.
Joe:
You are playing with the word "accident" which means
non-essential and conclude that it must receive its existence
from the other. Quality is not an accident since it has its
own existence in MOQ through evolution which is defined
as levels in existence.
It seems you are equating MOQ to evolution rather than Quality. Again, the
only "quality" one can assign to natural process is that it progresses in an
orderly fashion towards greater complexity, at least as viewed over time.
[Ham]:
3) Quality (the adjective) morphs into Quality (the noun)
by the process of evolution.
Joe:
This is a birds eye metaphysics which can be read in many ways.
In MOQ DQ/SQ represent different levels in existence, one
indefinable yet knowable like emotions, the other definable like
intellectual concepts.
In an ontology Time (a measure of change) is immaterial to
the principle of change. In evolution before and after are timeless
in a DQ/SQ metaphysical description which in MOQ are levels
in existence. Continuation is time sensitive only in first and last.
[Ham]:
Are you saying that emotions are indefinable, or that they are
not metaphysically definable? How does metaphysics "enable
further evolution"? I would think that evolution only applies to
the material (substantive) world. Is this Pirsig's concept that
Quality moves to "betterness"?
[Joe]:
Emotions are indefinable yet we cognize them. They embody
a level in existence different from the defined concepts of the
intellectual level. Emotions follow my individuality, and only
when they are totally repressed or disarranged am I subject to
reprisals for criminal activity when I have no defense for what
I did, or wanted. The jury system of law exemplifies the
difficulty of judgment, and maybe the jury will understand.
The jury is out right now. But to be sure I understand you correctly, I
need to know why "levels" are not also intellectually "cognized", and how
emotions could possibly not "follow individuality". Aren't we ourselves
(the subjects) feeling the emotions -- including the "quality" or degree of
goodness that we experience? And isn't morality learning from this
emotional sensibility how to optimize goodness throughout society?
I guess my query is leading toward the question: Why do we need a
metaphysics of Quality when mankind has demonstrated its ability to
establish a moral civilization with plain old SOM? (I realize I'm playing
devil's advocate with you here, but I'd really like to hear your answer.)
Thanks, again, Joe.
Ham
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
