Hi Horse Rather you are not reading me carefully enough, I accept conceptual patterns, these are SQ we all agree. But I also say percepts are pre-conceptual and patterned, I am perfectly happy to see percepts as SQ and all DQ as unpatterned, but this gives us pre-conceptual and conceptual SQ, it is DMB who thinks all SQ is conceptual not me. So where do you disagree with me?
Do you think all percepts are unpatterned and unconceptual and are therefore DQ? No it seems. Or do you think percepts are unconceptual but patterned SQ and therefore agree with me? Or do you think percepts are conceptual and patterned, this seems to be DMB's view but he endlessly wavers and sometimes seems to think percepts are unconceptual and unpatterned and are therefore DQ? I am saying percepts are patterned and pre-conceptual, happy to call these SQ, you seem to agree, but DMB thinks everything pre-conceptual is DQ, if you agree you must think percepts are conceptual, fine if you think that please argue why we should think this, but as I said before, there is pattern and content to percepts that should be clearly distinguished from our more formal intellectual and language enhanced level of SQ, I call this pre-conceptual, I have no idea why others here cannot agree to this, why should everything pre-conceptual be called DQ, there are patterns or senses in experience prior to concepts and language, all I want to do is recognise these, happy to call them SQ as you seem to be but surely they begin in forms that are pre-conceptual, yes there is distinction and differentiation here, but this is before the clear lines and formal language based forms that any normal people call concepts, let us call them proto-conceptual it it helps, but there are surely patterns in experience that we create concepts to identify, clarify and enhance? I seek this simple clarification and I am amazed this cannot simply be accepted, what is the real problem, people seem to argue with me one second, and say that all I have to do is reread what they said the next, well sorry where I see inconsistency and intellectual and analytical confusion I will call it out, if you cannot see what I am raising and questioning you are not reading me with enough care, until people understand my issue, and you claim not too, you should ask for clarification, suggesting I cannot read is really odd form of intellectual debate, not worth of you Sir!) You seem to say below percepts are post-experience, the flavour of a banana is post-experience, really? Please explain how that makes sense? This seems to make the MOQ unnecessarily absurd to me, surely between DQ flow and SQ concepts we have percepts, we experience them, we identify them, we build up concepts about them, they are the very basis of quality experience, are they not? Why say percepts are post-experience? Do we really leave experience when we recognise the difference between dark and light? Do we conceptualise when we blink at the light or strain in the dark? Those are odd formulation, the MOQ would be better served by recognising pre-conceptual SQ, no such rejection is in the books, only later theorising has created this mess it seems to me. If people want to argue that all percepts are conceptual please do so, but can these people stop ducking the issue and the obvious difficulties, address them, give reasons, that would greatly improve the intellectual quality on this forum. All the best David M Horse <[email protected]> wrote: >David > >It appears you don't read what others write. >There are no patterns in DQ. >All patterns are SQ. >SQ is fourfold - Inorganic, Biological, Social, Intellectual. >Concepts, precepts, tastes, senses are SQ. >All THINGS are SQ. >SQ is post-Experience (post-DQ). > >DMB is saying the same as Andre and myself - why are you unable to see this. > >Horse > > > >On 10/11/2013 11:57, David Morey wrote: >> Hi Andre >> >> Glad to hear it. There is much more agreement here than my interpreters seem >> to want to admit, I am against dualism and essentialism as much as anyone >> here, and it would be a lot more useful if people argued with what I am >> saying rather than with a heap of stuff I am not saying or have ever said. >> All I am saying is that before we conceptualise experience it is full of >> content, senses, tastes, etc. Now what do we call all this pattern, DMB >> says all SQ is conceptual, so is all sensual pattern DQ? Is DQ >> pre-definition but nonetheless full of pattern? Or is there a load of >> pre-conceptual SQ before we get to conceptual SQ that DMB is refusing to >> appreciate and recognise? I agree that there is something intelligent going >> on with cells, etc prior to full blown consciousness. >> >> David M >> >> Andre <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> David M to Andre: >>> So until there is culture and language there is no experience? >>> >>> Andre: >>> No, that's not what I'm saying. There is experience first after which we >>> try and find ways of describing this value. It is after the experience >>> we generate notions of 'banana taste', green or red colours, happy or >>> sad emotions and the like. >>> >>> There are, I'm sure, many things going on in my own body (organic stuff) >>> that I have no knowledge of. I do not need to think of breathing for it >>> to take place. The organic patterns themselves have learned that to the >>> extent that it's considered 'automatic'. It has an 'intelligence' of its >>> own. >>> >>> There are many things going on at all levels about which I have no >>> knowledge but my point is that this is NOT due to any inherent >>> 'property' of Dynamic Quality, that's all I'm trying to say David. >>> 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 >> > >-- > >"Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production >deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid." >— Frank Zappa > >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
