Hi Ham and all, I tried to write a reply to this statement, but my computer ate it and I don't know where it is. I will try again.
For me the only way to explain "the emergence of proprietary awareness" is value not indefinable individuality in metaphysics. Inorganic, organic one-celled, organic multiple-celled beings are observed that do not have "proprietary awareness". In a sentient being emotions are experienced and indefinable in possessing "proprietary awareness". "Essence" does not define a distinction between individualities with the manifest capabilities of sentient behavior without proposing an "Essence" for each individual. It proposes a body/soul division in the existence of a sentient individual. Individuality and Essence are confused in being indefinable in a theory proposing a difference in existence SOM. The difference in levels in existence is proposed by MOQ evolution. A one-level fits all "existence" is inadequate. A two level metaphysics of an "existence" S/O can only be imaginary. Where's the beef? The observation of levels in evolution like that accepted in the MOQ demands that the more rational explanation for evolution, levels in existence, needs an emotional metaphysical approval as physics with a language of defined mathematics are inadequate. Two different kinds of existence as subjective and objective in an observation for insentient, sentient1, and sentient2 behavior, ignores problems in individuality and differing qualities. You cannot accept DQ/SQ, and remain attached to only an intentional and real existence proposed in the metaphysical definition SO. MOQ embodies the more varied concepts of an evolution in existence, needed for a logic of evolution beyond S/O. Joe On 8/31/11 10:55 PM, "Ham Priday" <[email protected]> wrote: > In my opinion, the MoQ is incomplete as a metaphysical theory, and the > hierarchical levels of evolution do not account for the emergence of > proprietary awareness which is necessary for the realization of Value. I'm > well aware that these are serious charges, but it's clear to me that the > Quality thesis in its present form falls short of providing a meaning for > cognizant life and is an inadequate guide to human morality. 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
