learning, books! 2016-07-21 20:36 GMT+02:00 Adrie Kintziger <parser...@gmail.com>:
> As Dan wrote;, > > "I am a writer. Not that you would know that, and not a good one, > apparently. A writer. Me. Not a writer that enough people read to > enable me to write full time. Nope. Instead, I have to work a job to > keep the lights turned on and so forth and so on. Nevertheless, I > can't help but think I have it in me to write something good. Not > withstanding the fact I have yet to do so. Write anything good." > > ---------------------------- > This piece and the above that i left out of the snip was so nice to read > and > enjoy the words that it deserves to be spoken of. > You have a very good handling of words and the syntaxis to connect them,.. > if i'm allowed to use a metaphore here,you have the ability to make the > chords sing and sound.It is not about knowing the chords,or about the > setting of your fingers on the guitar's neck,but about how to make them > sound. > You'r a very capable writer, Dan,and the story's are simply there to > harvest. > Look around you,they are everywhere.Searching for the narrator to tell > them. > Simply look around in your national parks, your country's history, The > records on Ellis island,....etc ,etc....,there are no limitations other > than one's imagination or skills to record it and to reshape it into a book. > It always starts with page one. > Gaugin moved to Tahiti to get inspired, Van Gogh went to Arles, Jaques > Brel moved to Hiva Oa ,...but the works they made in France, Belgium or > Netherland were not of any lesser importance.Not a bit.Proving the point > that it is possible to remain in 'situ',and recreate the universe in one's > own way. > > I'm learning Diets, Plaudiets, and Plattduuts for the moment,(but only to > read.) > An enormous historic record becomes availiable these days for common > people, after and during the google bookscan project.They are scanning book > that are more than 300 years old.Keeps me occupied. > I'm learnig about the rootlanguage that made up my Flemish. > > Thinking of what you said about pronunciations of French and Spanish and > so on,just try them on native speakers, sure they will try to help you. > Some creativity is allowed here. > > Adrie > > > > 2016-07-20 8:25 GMT+02:00 Dan Glover <daneglo...@gmail.com>: > >> Tuukka, all, >> >> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Tuk <m...@tuukkavirtaperko.net> wrote: >> > Dan, Adrie, all, >> > >> > I've thought of things and yes, some things in the pattern language >> (thanks >> > for the concept, Adrie!) I'm proposing need to be reformulated. >> > >> > The discussion between Dan and me has uncovered some problems in the >> pattern >> > language I'm proposing. Dan proposes that biological patterns are >> identified >> > as such by virtue of containing DNA. Pirsig proposes life is carbon >> > chemistry. I've tried to develop an alternative view featuring some >> kind of >> > sense-based behavioral heuristic, of which I'm not sure how it exactly >> > works. >> > >> > I did that because neither Dan's nor Pirsig's approach seemed to >> describe >> > what biologicality is in a way that matches the immediate experience of >> > being human. Only on a car ride today did I realize that the pattern >> > language works even though it doesn't explicitly describe >> biologicality. It >> > may simply state that "the distinction between inorganic and biological >> > patterns is an intellectual pattern" without stating exactly what >> pattern >> > that is or which patterns qualify as that. >> > >> > That is to say, we don't need to resolve this issue in order to have a >> > pattern language that is, apparently, complete in the sense of >> addressing >> > all currently pressing issues. Of course some other issues might turn >> out >> > pressing later. >> >> Dan: >> And yes so then in our quest for knowledge, in any search for knowing, >> we are using our senses to make sense of the often-times inscrutable. >> Yet that doesn't mean we give up. We simply need to recognize, to >> realize, that we are inherently limited in our outlooks upon the world >> that we imagine is out there separate and apart from us and yet in a >> real way is inside us all, a shared dream, if you will, or nightmare, >> depending upon of course our imagination, or lack of it. >> >> Language is of course a pattern too. Me, I am limited to the English >> language though I do at times incorporate other tongues mostly in my >> writing and yeah sometimes in my speech but then I am never quite sure >> how to sound out certain words in German or French or even Spanish and >> so I'm a little reticent in using those particular words, at least in >> speech, fearful of being the idiot, though most times people I'm >> talking with have no idea how to pronounce them either, the words. >> >> But anyhow, so far as resolving issues, no, I doubt that's even >> possible. Instead, what we ought to be doing, what the MOQ seeks, is >> to expand our reach into the unknown, to continue the journey even >> while knowing there is no end to the search. That no matter how smart >> we are or become, what we know is but a grain of sand upon an endless >> beach of unknowns. >> >> > >> > >> >>> >> >>> Tuukka: >> >>> Pirsig writes that the ancient Egyptians were social whereas the Greek >> >>> were intellectual, but the MOQ wasn't invented back then. So I guess >> >>> rocks were inorganic and dinosaurs biological, too. >> >> >> >> Dan: >> >> Remember the gravity analogy from ZMM? That pertains to this point >> >> too. When we begin to mistake the map for the territory, when we take >> >> concepts as concrete reality, well then it only seems common sense to >> >> think biological and social patterns existed before Robert Pirsig >> >> invented the terms for his MOQ. Just like gravity existing before >> >> Newton's laws of gravity. If we think about it, however, the only >> >> conclusion we can make is that like gravity, biological and social >> >> patterns did not exist before they were invented. >> > >> > >> > Tuukka: >> > In any case, once Pirsig's letter to Turner was published the ancient >> > Egyptians became social and the ancient Greek intellectual. That's the >> > notion I'm trying to grasp here. >> >> Dan: >> Well, I think Mr. Pirsig answered the questions put to him as best as >> he could rather than deferring. Check it out: >> >> "Dear Paul Turner >> >> "The question you raise about the intellectual level has troubled me >> too. When I answered Dan Glover in Lila's Child, I remember being a >> little annoyed that anyone should ask what the intellectual level >> is-as though he were asking me what I mean by the word, "the." Any >> definition you give is more likely to complicate understanding than >> simplify it. But since then I have seen the question grow because the >> answer I have given is inadequate. >> >> "First of all, the line that, "Biologically [Lila's] fine, socially >> she's pretty far down the scale, intellectually she's nowhere. . ." >> did not mean that Lila was lying on the cabin floor unconscious, >> although some interpretations of the intellectual level would make it >> seem so. Like so many words, "intellectual" has different meanings >> that are confused. The first confusion is between the social title, >> "Intellectual," and the intellectual level itself. The statement, >> "Some intellectuals are not intellectual at all," becomes meaningful >> when one recognizes this difference. I think now that the statement >> "intellectually she's nowhere," could have been more exactly put: "As >> an intellectual Lila is nowhere." That would make it clearer that the >> social title was referred to and the dispute about her intellectuality >> would not have arisen. >> >> "Another subtler confusion exists between the word, "intellect," that >> can mean thought about anything and the word, "intellectual," where >> abstract thought itself is of primary importance. Thus, though it may >> be assumed that the Egyptians who preceded the Greeks had intellect, >> it can be doubted that theirs was an intellectual culture." >> >> Dan comments: >> See, notice how he qualifies his answer by first stating how difficult >> it is to answer. The question. How by doing so may in fact only sow >> more and greater confusion, especially since this language, English, >> is prone to alternate meanings even given the same word and sometimes >> even the same context. But on the other hand, he decides to do it, >> damn the torpedoes and all that. >> >> More from Robert Pirsig's letter: >> "When getting into a definition of the intellectual level much clarity >> can be gained by recognizing a parallel with the lower levels. Just as >> every biological pattern is also inorganic, but not all inorganic >> patterns are biological; and just as every social level is also >> biological, although not all biological patterns are social; so every >> intellectual pattern is social although not all social patterns are >> intellectual. Handshaking, ballroom dancing, raising one's right hand >> to take an oath, tipping one's hat to the ladies, saying "Gesundheit >> !" after a sneeze-there are trillions of social customs that have no >> intellectual component. Intellectuality occurs when these customs as >> well as biological and inorganic patterns are designated with a sign >> that stands for them and these signs are manipulated independently of >> the patterns they stand for. "Intellect" can then be defined very >> loosely as the level of independently manipulable signs. Grammar, >> logic and mathematics can be described as the rules of this sign >> manipulation." >> >> Dan comments: >> I think this paragraph answers your questions about guitars and >> clothes and how they can be strictly inorganic patterns or inorganic >> and biological patterns simultaneously depending upon the origins of >> materials used to construct said patterns. Also it shows how social >> and intellectual patterns, although discrete systems in their own >> right, cannot exist without the underlying inorganic and biological >> patterns that uphold them. In essence, when we walk out of a room, it >> cannot be said to exist or to not exist. The room. The story ends. And >> yeah, then we can perhaps walk back into the room and reassure >> ourselves that it does indeed exist. The room. Or not. If something >> has occurred in our absence to destroy the room. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >>> Maybe, if an inorganic pattern accumulates value as the extension of a >> >>> biological pattern, it simply retains the value. >> >>> >> >>> Come to think of it, even in my current model the inorganic level can >> >>> have >> >>> more value than the biological if the biological level has negative >> value >> >>> and a biological pattern uses an inorganic pattern to do something >> good. >> >>> Perhaps I have to measure value here so that it never has negative >> value. >> >>> Yeah, that would seem to work. >> >> >> >> Dan: >> >> If there is no negative value, then what impetus drives progress and >> >> evolution? >> > >> > >> > Tuukka: >> > >> > What I meant is that we have to measure value without negative values in >> > this context because of the following problem: >> > >> > Suppose a biological pattern Jane of a value of -5 playing a guitar of 0 >> > value so that 3 units of value are accumulated. In this case the >> biological >> > level would have a value of -2 whereas the inorganic level would have a >> > value of 3. This makes the pattern language contradict Pirsig because >> Pirsig >> > says the biological level has more value than the inorganic level. >> > >> > We can resolve the contradiction in the following way: >> > >> > Negative value and positive value accumulate as biological patterns make >> > choices. However, we have to store the negative and positive value to >> > different variables. If we sum these variables, we get the relative >> value of >> > the pattern. The aforementioned problem features relative values. >> However, >> > if we sum the absolute values of these variables, we get the absolute >> value >> > of the pattern, which would be 3 for the guitar and 7 for Jane. When >> Pirsig >> > writes that the biological level has more quality than the inorganic >> level >> > he means that it has more absolute value. >> > >> > Relative value drives progress and evolution. >> >> Dan: >> The way I understand it, there are no absolute values in the MOQ. You >> seem to be arbitrarily assigning value to patterns and then making >> assumptions on those values arbitrarily assigned and then saying, see! >> Here is a contradiction. >> >> > >> >> >> >>>>> Do you see what I'm aiming at? In everyday life it doesn't matter >> >>>>> whether >> >>>>> an >> >>>>> article of clothing is made from synthetic fibres or human hair. >> It's >> >>>>> still >> >>>>> an article of clothing. It's an object. It doesn't walk around on >> its >> >>>>> own >> >>>>> and it doesn't breathe, and so on. I just think this kind of a >> division >> >>>>> between the inorganic and the biological is more in accord with >> >>>>> everyday >> >>>>> common sense use of language than focusing on the point that clothes >> >>>>> made >> >>>>> of >> >>>>> human hair contain DNA. Who cares about that? And why? >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Dan: >> >>>> First of all, it is okay to use subject/object terminology as long as >> >>>> it is remembered that those terms stand for patterns of value. >> Second, >> >>>> we are discussing the MOQ and its terminology, which may or may not >> >>>> differ from everyday terminology. Is blood a biological pattern? It >> >>>> doesn't walk around and breathe. How about organs awaiting >> transplant? >> >>>> A heart, or a set of lungs? Kidneys? Are those biological patterns? >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Tuukka: >> >>> Well, they're *parts* of a biological pattern. >> >> >> >> Dan: >> >> So is a baby part of a biological pattern too? >> > >> > >> > Tuukka: >> > Whichever it is, the pattern that decides that is an intellectual >> pattern. >> >> Dan: >> Ah. So we throw up our hands? >> >> > >> >> >> >>>> Who cares? Well, maybe no one. On the other hand, people still seem >> to >> >>>> be reading Robert Pirsig and discussing his work. So maybe a few >> >>>> people care. I know I care enough to be working out this reply to >> you. >> >>>> I mean, I could just say the hell with it. I've got better things to >> >>>> do. But I care. And too, it has been my experience, sometimes sad) >> >>>> that common sense ain't all that common. Truthfully. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Tuukka: >> >>> You can't seriously believe I, out of all people, intended to >> >>> trivialize metaphysics. >> >> >> >> Dan: >> >> You asked the question. I take it that it was rhetorical. The question. >> > >> > >> > Tuukka: >> > It meant: "Why do you care?" >> >> Dan: >> Me? Personally? Well, let me see if I can explain it in terms others >> might (or might not) understand. Recently I suffered, though no, >> suffer might not be the proper word. Experienced. Let's say I >> experienced the need for emergency surgery. Which to me, someone who's >> never been in a hospital other than to visit others who are in >> hospitals, was rather disconcerting. >> >> But so anyhow yeah there I was in some weird room, when I woke up, >> alone, and above me was a ceiling, which in itself was not all that >> surprising since I pretty much knew I was in a hospital and what had >> happened to me, the preconditions that were set in place to >> necessitate my hospitalization, and most all rooms, at least in this >> part of the world, have ceilings. >> >> No, what was rather awe-inspiring were all the words written in the >> blazing white ceiling in a small and cramped and black cursive sort of >> writing and as I lay there I could just about but not quite make out >> the words on that ceiling and yeah a part of me knew those words >> weren't really there, of course, but on the other hand, laying there, >> it seemed to another part of me that if I could read those words, >> which I couldn't quite manage no matter how I squinted, well then I >> might or might not learn something I didn't know. Before. >> >> I am a writer. Not that you would know that, and not a good one, >> apparently. A writer. Me. Not a writer that enough people read to >> enable me to write full time. Nope. Instead, I have to work a job to >> keep the lights turned on and so forth and so on. Nevertheless, I >> can't help but think I have it in me to write something good. Not >> withstanding the fact I have yet to do so. Write anything good. >> >> So why do I care? I care on account of the possibility that those >> words I saw on the ceiling in that hospital room really did mean >> something. That those words are inside me, somewhere, waiting to be >> born. And maybe these words right here are part of them. Those words I >> saw but couldn't quite read. Or maybe this is all just a bunch of >> silly shite and none of it means a thing. Either way, caring seems >> better than not caring. >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> >>>> Dan: >> >>>> But isn't that so for the universe in general? When the story stops, >> >>>> so does the universe. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Tuukka: >> >>> Yeah. Quality is modeled by the mind, and the mind is biological. >> >> >> >> Dan: >> >> Ideas come first. Then comes the biological mind. >> > >> > >> > Tuukka: >> > What do you mean? Intellectual patterns come first? In a temporal sense >> or >> > in a priority order? Do you mean that the biological mind is an idea? >> >> Dan: >> What else can it be but an idea? >> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Dan: >> >>>> Yes, I can see that. But can't we say the same of social and >> >>>> intellectual patterns? >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Tuukka: >> >>> The volition of social and intellectual patterns manifests via >> biological >> >>> patterns. >> >> >> >> Dan: >> >> I would say rather that biological patterns manifest at the behest of >> >> ideas, or intellectual patterns. >> >> >> >> >> > >> > Tuukka: >> > Because the notion of "biological pattern" is an idea? I get that, but >> what >> > are you trying to do here? Turn everything into an idea? Remember the >> hot >> > stove. That's not an idea. >> >> Dan: >> The hot stove experiment is meant to point to direct experience >> without intellectual mediation. That chair you stub your toe on while >> crossing a darkened room isn't an idea at first. It isn't anything. >> Not until you intellectually realize you just stubbed your toe on it, >> the chair. Then, it becomes a chair. But the idea comes first. Same >> thing with the hot stove. Same principle. >> >> So no, I am not trying to turn everything into an idea. That response >> seems a knee-jerk reaction from someone who hasn't a good handle on >> the MOQ. In my opinion, of course. Which means little. My opinion. It >> just seems so. To me. >> >> Thank you, >> Dan >> >> http://www.danglover.com >> 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 >> > > > > -- > parser > -- parser 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
