Hi Dan, Robert,

On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Dan Glover <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello Robert,
>
> On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 3:58 AM, Robert Warlov <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The answer is suggested in the book: 'Hitchickers guide to the galaxy'.
> See
> > the commentary that ends in the words: "... How shall we eat? Why do we
> > eat? and where shall we have lunch?"
> >
> > The answer to the question of what evolves from intellect, the next form
> > inhabited by Quality is art itself.
>
> Dan:
> I would say intellect informs art.
>


J:  I would say intellect evolved through an artform.  A fairly rigorous
art, with sharply defined rules.  But both art and intellect are best when
they inform each other - ideas that are beautiful and works that are true.
So informs, yes.  But it goes both ways and Quality is in the balance.



>
> >
> > Because biology reaches its limited form, it takes a radical step,
> finding
> > "Betterness" in repeating the process the protozoa 'discovered' in
> > subsuming itself to membership in a metazoan society.
>
> Dan:
> I would say that when we talk about the MOQ, social patterns are not
> to be seen as a collection of biological patterns. To do so is to
> create confusion.
>
>

Jc:  I think what you mean is that the pattern which guides the biological
beings, is not biological itself, if you don't mind my  rephrasing, I
agree.  But a pattern that guides, if it's at war, or in conflict with the
level it is supposed to be guiding, there is a problem.

Rob:

>
> > Society or community undertakes activities whose driver is "betterness"
> > too. Certain aspects of biological quality are discovered  to be
> > antithetical to social quality.
>

Jc:  Antithetical?  It seems to me that society values the biological
success of it's members, so in the long run there's very little in
biological patterns which is anti-thetical to social rules.  Biological
needs such as shelter and food and procreation, are all provided more amply
by a successful society, than they are with a biological individual alone.
Or we woudn't have banded together in the first place.

Rob:


> Order seems to produce a stronger society.
> > Hence disorder must be mitigated by law.
>
> Dan:
> Social patterns make use of biological patterns the same way
> biological patterns make use of inorganic patterns.
>
>
Jc:  Exactly.  "make use of"  not "compete with".


Rob:


> >
> > If it's easy to see how these are related. It's harder to see the same
> > process applied to 'Intellect'.
> >
> > My generation was not seeking to subvert 'Intellect' but to illuminate
> it's
> > excesses - that which threatened 'disorder' or 'Decay'.
> >
>


Jc:  Any criticism of intellect, is done intellectually because intellect
is the art of criticism!  So I don't see how social patterns possibly could
"argue" with intellectual ones.  The levels are mostly discrete.  So I
think, Rob, the generation of your day, identified with Orwell's Winston
Smith, the individuals trapped in a world of SOM certainty - classical
intellect as highest value.  The MoI instead of the MoQ.

And I often wonder, if it's snuck back through the door, with the way the
MoQ has intellect as it's "highest value".  I see the levels as holistic
and relational rather than competitive and hierarchical.  But I guess that
makes me some kind of heretic so never mind.

Rob:


> > As intellect informs society so Art must inform intellect to midigate
> it's
> > destructive formations.
>
>
Jc:  That sounds absolutely right on.  Excessive romantic quality calls for
more classic and excessive classic requires an aesthetic intuitive leap out
of the prison.  It's an ongoing process of historical intellectual
evolution.


> Dan:
> I think this is not quite correct. The moral codes actively oppose one
> another. Intellectual patterns do not seek to inform social patterns,
> rather they oppose them.


Jc:

Dan, is NOT a heretic.  :-)

Dan:


> Remember the parties Phaedrus attended and
> how all the intellectuals were rebelling against 'The Man'?
> Similarly, the code of art would not inform intellect so much as it
> would seek to usurp it. I don't see that artists are interested in the
> mundane world. They seek to create something new, not to imitate...
> sort of like the difference between philosophy and philosophology.
>
>
Jc:  I'm no longer so convinced that any of those dichotomies are
necessarily opposed, and most especially the last two.

Philosophy and philosophology are intertwined throughout time.  Philosophy
is always as much in dialogue with its past, as it is in the present.
Understanding how our thoughts became as they are, through the choices made
before us, is fundamental to "knowing thyself".  I admit they are slightly
different, but they are both necessary.  You can't have one without the
other.




> >
> > Atomic bombs are unhealthy for living things and living things are
> valuable.
>
> Dan:
> I think that depends upon the context.



Jc:  I think young Bob would have walked out of your classroom, Dan!  You
can't really argue or temporize "Atomic bombs are unhealthy for living
things and living things are valuable"

Dan tries:


> Atomic bombs might conceivably
> be used to either destroy or steer away an asteroid threatening the
> earth. In that case, they would be valuable for living things.
>
>
Jc sheepish:  Ok, I guess that's a point.  I was thinking "for" in the
context of earthly use.  If you're going to take them to outerspace, you
might be right.


Rob:

>
> > If Quality preceeds experience, there can be no experience of Quality and
> > if Quality is the arbiter of experience, there is no sensible experience
> > without it.
>
>
Jc:  If my mother gave birth to me, can I still experience my mother?
       There's no being born, without being born.



> Dan:
> Again, I would say it depends on which context you are using the term
> 'quality' here. In the MOQ, Quality and experience are synonymous.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Dan
>
>

  No, thank YOU, Dan.  Well said.

John
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

Reply via email to