Greetings,
Contradiction is a dis-ease only if one assumes that it is not the immediate
events and situations that are real but the isolated abstractions. That is why
I think of _static patterns of value_ as hypothetical (supposed but not
necessarily real or true.)
I find it more useful to consider objects of knowledge (stuff in the
encyclopedia) as 'static patterns of value' ("patterns") rather than 'truths'.
The term 'patterns' is a good representation. And I prefer to think of _static
patterns of value_ as hypothetical (supposed but not necessarily real or true.)
Once one accepts the MoQ's fundamental principal that the world is nothing
but Value, then 'expanded rationality' occurs when an individual transforms the
natural tendency to reify self and world into the natural tendency to hold all
static patterns of value to be hypothetical (supposed but not necessarily real
or true.) By using 'hypothetical' I think there is less of a tendency toward
intellectual arrogance. Understanding static (patterned) value as hypothetical
acknowledges the incompleteness of what we know and makes room for additional
inquiry with new possibilities; it promotes an attitude of fearless curiosity -
gumption. It moves one away from thinking of entit
ies as existing inherently and independent of consciousness.
Sure, static patterns of value may be considered useful. Who doubts that? Not
I!
Marsha
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
