At 12:04 PM 3/19/2007, you wrote: >[Marsha] >What about your use of 'betterness'? It's a word you've used as an >equivalent of 'value'. Doesn't this 'betterness' imply a comparative >(subjective) value? > >[Arlo] >Again, this comparative state is experienced within the confines of >the level in question. In the moment of direct experience, an amoeba >experiences value (in the case of the acid, this is experience as a >low-quality state). In that moment, I suppose you could say the >amoeba becomes the "subject" and the low-quality environment the >"object", but again this is not to suggest the "subjectiveness" of >the amoeba is anything like the complex "subjectiveness" we >conceptualize on the social and intellectual levels. In fact, I'd >say the amoeba never experiences "subject/object". Having no symbolic >representation of "self" or "other", the amoeba is "trapped" in >primary, direct experience limited not only to inorganic-biological >value, but to pretty unsophisticated biological value as well (a >"wolf", for example, experiences a much more complex range of >biological value).
Arlo, In our discussion, I do not remember you limiting the use of 'betterness' to the two subjective levels (Social and Intellectual). m 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
