Hi dmb,
On Dec 3, 2012, at 2:22 AM, MarshaV wrote: "... A primary occupation of every level of evolution seems to be offering freedom to lower levels of evolution. But as the higher level gets more sophisticated it goes off on purposes of its own. Once this independent nature of the levels of static patterns of value is understood a lot of puzzles get solved. The first one is the usual puzzle of value itself. In a subject-object metaphysics, value has always been the most vague and ambiguous of terms. What is it? When you say the world is composed of nothing but value, what are you talking about? "Phaedrus thought this was why no one before had ever seemed to have come up with the idea that the world is primarily value. The word is too vague. The 'value' that holds a glass of water together and the 'value' that holds a nation together are obviously not the same thing. Therefore to say that the world is nothing but value is just confusing, not clarifying. "Now this vagueness is removed by sorting out values according to levels of evolution. The value that holds a glass of water together is an inorganic pattern of value. The value that holds a nation together is a social pattern of value. They are completely different from each other because they are at different evolutionary levels. And they are completely different from the biological pattern that can cause the most sceptical of intellectuals to leap from a hot stove. These patterns have nothing in common except the historic evolutionary process that created all of them. But that process is a process of value evolution. Therefore the name 'static pattern of values' applies to all." (RMP, 'LILA', Chapter 12) Marsha wrote: Yes: "Therefore the name 'static pattern of values' applies to all." Using this vernacular leads one to naturally "examine intellectual realities (patterns) the same way he examines paintings of in an art gallery, not with an effort to find out which one is the ‘real’ painting, but simply to enjoy and keep those that are of value." (It's not intellectual static truths.). RMP has it just right. Marsha later said: In my humble opinion, American Pragmatism can be made better by replacing 'truth' with inorganic, biological, social and intellectual static patterns of value. dmb said: The levels are not only different, sometimes they even conflict with each other. This is the core concept behind the MOQ's moral hierarchy. Just as health is a biological good, fame and fortune are social goods, truth is an intellectual species of the good. Truth can't be replaced by sex or money, obviously. That's too goofy to merit any further dispute. Marsha: Though down through the ages the conception of truth has been a contentious topic of debate, within the Metaphysics of Quality, truth (as objects of knowledge) loses its philosophical underpinning and antagonism to be replaced instead by static patterns of value. It is not _intellectual static truths_. It's intellectual static patterns of value, and RMP's terminology has it stated just right. Using this vernacular leads one to naturally "examine intellectual realities (patterns) the same way he examines paintings of in an art gallery, not with an effort to find out which one is the ‘real’ painting, but simply to enjoy and keep those that are of value." ___ 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
