Jan We can not see where we are going only where we have been.. Ron
Jan Anders Andersson <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi Ron > >Literally that would be like a rear-view mirror mounted on top of the >intellectual level? :-) > >I can take that. But no one is driving by looking into that, most motorcycle >riders look forward at the road, using a map to find the way, to Bozeman for >example. > >J A Andersson > >> Mr Anders, >> I think the copplestone quote sheds a little light on the subject, the one >> where >> it is stated that truth is the highest intellectual pattern but..it is >> subordinate >> to intellectual quality. >> >> What does that mean? >> >> >> I think it means that the best truths are those that support the best of the >> lower >> forms of quality, excellence in mind body and environment. >> >> >> That not only is the test of truth its use in the flow of experience but >> also its overall >> excellence and worth to the human species as a whole. >> >> -Ron >> >> .. >> >> Jan Anders Andersson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Dear women and gentlemen >>> >>> The original question seemed to me as a kind of IQ quiz, you know, like the >>> series of 4 symbols that evolve in some weird pattern and there is an empty >>> space for the fifth that should be filled in. I like that kind of >>> challenges but I don't cry if I can't do it right. >>> >>> What the four levels have in common is that the latter is built on and >>> dependant on the former, but doing it by its own purpose. Right? >>> A fifth MOQ level should thus be based on the intellectual level but with >>> its own purpose. >>> So what is the purpose of MOQ. Is it dependant on the intellectual level? >>> Is it just a branch of the old "New age" spirituality? >>> >>> I don't claim that MOQ is the best and the only way to describe its >>> precedent levels of pattern, but to me the perspective point, the value >>> base for MOQ concepts, concepts ABOUT intellectual concepts, should be >>> found somewhere outside the intellectual level. This "About" deserves that >>> theres is a distance from what is observed and discussed. Otherwise it >>> would run into an infinite loop of intellectuality. >>> >>> Maybe this is just the base for Excellence, the Intellectual Quality >>> Experience of The MOQ Value or where do you think it is? >>> >>> Jan Anders >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Jan-Anders said: >>>> In my view, MOQ IS at the 5th level, because metaphysics is based >>>> "above", or "outside" the intellectual level. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> dmb says: >>>> Metaphysics is above the intellectual level? Metaphysics is just a branch >>>> of philosophy. It's the area of philosophy that deals with the most basic >>>> questions like, "what is reality made of?" and "how can we have >>>> knowledge?". Why do we need a whole other level of reality for that? >>>> >>>> I'm guessing that you take "metaphysics" to mean something that it does >>>> not mean. New Age spirituality, or something? >>>> >>>> >>>> Ron: >>>> Thanks for endeavoring to clear that up Dave because I believe that is the >>>> core of alot of misunderstanding here. >>>> It needs to be hammered on. The consequences of equating MoQ with >>>> "reality" are so great and far reaching >>>> that it pretty much is a case of solving by redefining, you are still >>>> stuck in the assumption that concepts are reality. >>>> Now some may beg to argue that concepts are reality, that static patterns >>>> are the flux of experience but then >>>> we must ask how this differs from positivism. >>>> >>>> I think there are quite a few who do think metaphysics is a new age >>>> spirituality, this error in understanding >>>> accounts for much of the assertions of Bodvars theories and mistakes. >>>> >>>> This has always perplexed me that people here, on a philosophy forum, do >>>> not take the time nor the effort >>>> to research what it is we are talking about, we are on computers for cryin >>>> out loud anyone can look up >>>> any word or concept and instantly gain a better understanding of the terms >>>> and the theories as they are >>>> commonly understood and call them into question when used out of context >>>> or inappropriately. >>>> >>>> Arlo had a point, I think some here are in it for the AA meeting quality >>>> and are not interested in the philosophical >>>> aspect, that shit is too square. When somebody points out that this is a >>>> philosophy forum and not an AA meeting >>>> they get shouted down as a dogmatist, dialectician, academic, SOMist . Any >>>> time the living philosophy aspect >>>> of this forum emerges it gets shut down by a disagreement of the very >>>> basics of intellectual quality. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> .. >>>> 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 >> 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 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
