RE: MD A fifth quality level?
Hi Platt The Aharonov-Bohm Effect In classical mechanics the motion of a charged particle is not affected by the presence of magnetic fields in regions from which the particle is excluded. The motion of classical particles emitted by the source S is not affected by the magnetic field B because the particles can not enter the region of space where the magnetic field is present. For a quantum charged particle there can be an observable phase shift in the interference pattern recorded at the detector D. This phase shift results from the fact that although the magnetic field is zero in the space accessible to the particle, the associated vector potential is not. The phase shift depends on the flux enclosed by the two alternative sets of paths a and b. But the overall envelope of the diffraction pattern is not displaced indicating that no classical magnetic force acts on the particles. The Aharonov-Bohm effect demonstrates that the electromagnetic potentials, rather than the electric and magnetic fields, are the fundamental quantities in quantum mechanics. The Aharonov-Bohm Effect AB showed that one of the results of elementary quantum theory is that there are physical effects on charged particles in regions in which the electromagnetic field is nonexistant. The controversial features of the AB effect concern its interpretation; there is no disagreement as to the effect itself. The interpretation problem arises because the charge particles are influenced although they always move in field free regions. Hence the key question of the AB effect concerns localization and action-at-a-distance. AB claimed a special significance for the electromagnetic potentials because they are non-zero 'where the action is,' whereas the fields are zero in the regions to which the charged particles are confined. I must have missed the great debate on this topic, because IMHO Bohm's work (in several areas) is of direct relevance i will piece together something on this and post it, it may take a bit of time. There are a few books that Bohm has written that have what i can only describe as a physical description of dynamic quality, if you have the time try Wholeness and the Implicate Order , and also Thought as a System, anyone who reads them will see what I mean, there are a few others here who have and do. Bohm's opinions on how science is carried out and how the SOM is not neccessarily the best approach mirror Pirsigs comments in Zamm, after Poincare and Sidis i would be surprised but not shocked if RMP had not heard of the chaps work, they do take different approaches but they are covering the same terrain and seeing the same features,bye for now, Stephen -Original Message- From: Platt Holden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 28 June 2001 20:26 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: MD A fifth quality level? Hi Stephen Devlin: STEPHEN: The intellect likes hierarchies, boxes, tables and further abstractions but the Anahorov-Bohm effect (experimentally verified) is showing that matter is aware of its surroundings thus showing that there is an interrelationship that the present MOQ hierarchy doesn't address. It's been experimentally verified that atoms are aware? That's news to me and I'm sure to others who participated recently on this site in a great debate on that very subject with some saying no way and others saying by all means or otherwise the MOQ falls apart. Could you elaborate on the Anahorov-Bohn effect and its verification? Thanks. Platt MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html _ This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. _ This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
RE: MD A fifth quality level?
Hi Stephen: Many thanks for the explanation of the Aharonov-Bohm effect. As I understand it, Bohm rejected the idea that an observer was necessary for quantum effects to take place, ruling out mind or consciousness as playing any role at that level. The question then arises, How could DQ have influenced quantum particles during the beginnings of the Universe in the absence of some form of awareness on their part, however slight? I look forward to your relating Bohm's theories to the MOQ and a possible physical description of Dynamic Quality. The less techinical, the better. (-: Platt MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
Re: MD A fifth quality level?
Hi Squonk and Discussers. You said: Quality relieved me of all that science stuff also. I came to realise that science is a creative activity; a quality activity and high quality at that. But the static patterns a high quality creative activity generates is not the whole of reality is it? Not even a MOQ does that! This your last post impressed me greatly and I must be careful not to add any uncalled for buts. The only remark here is that if a metaphysics is what Pirsig defines it: the most basic template of reality (and not of something obscure and farfetched) a switch from subject/object metaphysics (SOM) to quality metaphysics* (QM) is from one totality to another. But, admittedly, even within the QM - especially within the QM - there is always a dynamic urge to work its way around the last static latch. *) I'm a bit tired of the MoQ acronym, so for a while QM. Now and then, i am attracted to the ever gushing fountain of quality we think of as scientific endeavour; there are some titillating things going on out there, and sometimes it can all be too irresistible? ;) As said, I have come to perceive the 4th level as REASON itself (subject/objectivism) and science - particle physics and cosmology preferrably - its spearhead. Yet, the weirdness that the quantum world displays and the strange theories that cosmology spawns to cope with it, is adjusted to its s/o template. So, it won't be science that brings evolution forward. But - admittedly - its titillating findings can be used as arguments if one avoids making weirdness a goal in itself. Now, this is my point: I thought about 5th level latching from the point of view of quality. I imagined what 5th level would be moving away from, and how 4th level would be manipulated and controlled; how 4th level would be the site of emergence for 5th level? This is a great insight. What a 5th would be moving away from would - IMO - be the subject/object division itself and this opens up an enormous vista and is why I see the QM as leaving every theory (even the weirdest) in the dust. How Intellect will be manipulated/controlled? We needn't fear Gestapo - no, that's 3d level business - I think you and I are examples: we have started to regard Intellect the ultimate provider of truth. How the 4th level can be the site of emergence for a 5th level is a good question and a subtle point. Remember my opening remark about the totality of a metaphysics? Intellect - along with all other levels - is a QM product so a 5th level only make sense in its context. I have thought a lot about this and think it makes sense, but let me return to that in another post. And guess what? All that irresistible stuff that quality relieves us from is the site of emergence for 5th level! That high quality intellectual stuff?!? Right But lets get back to quality... Direct stimulation of the brain bypasses conventional sensory input. [ Can you imagine Descartes with this! :-) ] The move would be pure quality; no one is going to wish to disintegrate ones individuality and integrity unless the perceived relationship between technology and self was of value? Once emergent 5th level had overcome our Frankenstein complex of leaping into the fearful unknown, 5th level will be off on its own path. Is this for Stephen ...or? Anyway, it sounds like the prodding of brains experiment that Prof. Penfield performed and Benjamin Libet refined, in which he reached the famous 0,5 second delay result. Yes, this is really weird stuff and was a thread some time back when Struan Hellier used it AGAINST the QM ...but then he used everything against it. Thanks for this input Squonk, it's the first time I've seen anyone grab on to these most flimsy dynamic probings. I'll will be off-line for a couple of weeks from now on, but keep thinking and posting. Bo MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
RE: MD A fifth quality level?
Stephen, Squonk MoQ Discuss. I have discussed the Quality idea at these moq.org sites for ever it seems, and have heard/seen names dropped (none mentioned none forgotten) all supposed to say the same as Pirsig or their ideas to have some bearing on the Quality Metaphysics. Nothing wrong with this, let me just ramble on a little. In the sixties I was fascinated by Relativity and read everything about that, later I got hooked on Quantum Physics and read everything available on quantum-related stuff; for instance Danah Zohar and her Einstein-Bose condensate as the site of consciousness. I also looked into the many theories forwarded to reconcile experience with the quantum strangeness. Multiverses, wormholes etc, but the Quality Metaphysics relieved me from the science folly. I hope I don't sound quasi-religious, it's not that retro-kind of relief the MoQ offers (and I have not stopped reading science magazines completely), but it has somehow gone the scientific path all the way and landed in a new territory. You (Stephen and Squonk) may not have been with the discussion for very long (or looked into old posts) but I guess you have some basic knowledge about the MoQ, the point is that I have come to regard the intellectual level as the crux. Most people tend to look upon it as consciousness or MIND (of what Pirsig calls SOM) but it should rather be regarded as the mind/matter division itself. The very idea of a subject observing an objective world. REASON!!! This is where the MoQ takes leave of everything previously conceived of. We seem to be the stuck in the picture that we perceive the world from some God's eye view, but in the MoQ there is no upper limit to the Q-evolution and a development above the Intellect may well be possible. So now, Squonk, you possibly see what I am up to: If Intellect isn't consciousness/awareness (mind) then a development out-of-intellect is no supermind. Quantum-computed or not. Enough for now. Bo PS Thanks Stephen for the material you sent me. MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
RE: MD A fifth quality level?
Bo said the point is that I have come to regard the intellectual level as the crux. Most people tend to look upon it as consciousness or MIND (of what Pirsig calls SOM) but it should rather be regarded as the mind/matter division itself. The very idea of a subject observing an objective world. REASON!!! One of the problems I have with the mind/matter division is language. We describe an object as composed of matter outside of time itself. One of ZAMM's helpful analogies (of which there are several) was the apriori motorbike. After reading this it is clear that we assume that matter has a stable structure but this is all related to time (even mountains crumble and stars have a shelf life). If our intellects are reticent to keep this temporal quality in mind as we contemplate various ideas we're not going to get anywhere(as we will have only a partial view).Perhaps the intelect obscures this temporal quality(entropy acting?) to prevent us contemplating our own lifespan, at a certain level that could be depressing which is not good for survival. The intellect likes hierarchies, boxes, tables and further abstractions but the Anahorov-Bohm effect (experimentally verified) is showing that matter is aware of its surroundings thus showing that there is an interrelationship that the present MOQ hierarchy doesn't address.Quantum physics is showing that there is a point where in an experiment the observer is affecting the observed,this leads you to consider if the mind/matter division is a false construct (as mind could be affecting the matter it thinks it is isolated from and if so where does that put intellect? Quality (ie meaning,value) is stilll left strong, Language also gives us the false impression that by giving a label to a thing be it a tree or a metaphysics we have somehow sufficiently grasped (intellectually) that thing. As all of us are aware in any matter there are countless interactions happening simultaneously that our intellects have no sensory input for yet none of these interactions appear in a metaphysics, or if they do their meaning is only appreciated at an organic level and then left there on the lowest rung by an intellect that may or may not like the implications of those interactions. If intellect is the highest of the levels in the MOQ hierarchy then why does the hormones and chemicals in the body devastate its ability to function in a lot of individuals (psychosomatic illness as an example of the intellect?(speculating) damaging its body and itself to what purpose? bye for now sephen -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 28 June 2001 08:36 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: MD A fifth quality level? Stephen, Squonk MoQ Discuss. I have discussed the Quality idea at these moq.org sites for ever it seems, and have heard/seen names dropped (none mentioned none forgotten) all supposed to say the same as Pirsig or their ideas to have some bearing on the Quality Metaphysics. Nothing wrong with this, let me just ramble on a little. In the sixties I was fascinated by Relativity and read everything about that, later I got hooked on Quantum Physics and read everything available on quantum-related stuff; for instance Danah Zohar and her Einstein-Bose condensate as the site of consciousness. I also looked into the many theories forwarded to reconcile experience with the quantum strangeness. Multiverses, wormholes etc, but the Quality Metaphysics relieved me from the science folly. I hope I don't sound quasi-religious, it's not that retro-kind of relief the MoQ offers (and I have not stopped reading science magazines completely), but it has somehow gone the scientific path all the way and landed in a new territory. You (Stephen and Squonk) may not have been with the discussion for very long (or looked into old posts) but I guess you have some basic knowledge about the MoQ, the point is that I have come to regard the intellectual level as the crux. Most people tend to look upon it as consciousness or MIND (of what Pirsig calls SOM) but it should rather be regarded as the mind/matter division itself. The very idea of a subject observing an objective world. REASON!!! This is where the MoQ takes leave of everything previously conceived of. We seem to be the stuck in the picture that we perceive the world from some God's eye view, but in the MoQ there is no upper limit to the Q-evolution and a development above the Intellect may well be possible. So now, Squonk, you possibly see what I am up to: If Intellect isn't consciousness/awareness (mind) then a development out-of-intellect is no supermind. Quantum-computed or not. Enough for now. Bo PS Thanks Stephen for the material you sent me. MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md
Re: MD A fifth quality level?
Hello Stephen, Bo and all!
Thanks for your thoughts Bo and Stephen.
First Bo if i may?
Quality relieved me of all that science stuff also.
I came to realise that science is a creative activity; a quality activity —
and high quality at that.
But the static patterns a high quality creative activity generates is not the
whole of reality is it?
Not even a MOQ does that!
Now and then, i am attracted to the ever gushing fountain of quality we think
of as scientific endeavour; there are some titillating things going on out
there, and sometimes it can all be too irresistible? ;)
Now, this is my point:
I thought about 5th level latching from the point of view of quality.
I imagined what 5th level would be moving away from, and how 4th level would
be manipulated and controlled; how 4th level would be the site of emergence
for 5th level?
And guess what?
All that irresistible stuff that quality relieves us from is the site of
emergence for 5th level!
That high quality intellectual stuff?!?
OK!
Speculation again — its fun! :-)
But lets get back to quality...
Direct stimulation of the brain bypasses conventional sensory input.
[ Can you imagine Descartes with this! :-) ]
The move would be pure quality; no one is going to wish to disintegrate ones
individuality and integrity unless the perceived relationship between
technology and self was of value? Once emergent 5th level had overcome our
Frankenstein complex of leaping into the fearful unknown, 5th level will be
off on its own path.
Do you not feel it to be ironic that the possibility of many minds,
(intellectual patterns) in a relationship with individuality destroying 5th
level — as a DQ event — to be deeply challenging to SOM!
Stephen?
In the context of Self/AI relationship, a priori models of anything become
nebulous?
Intellectual patterns may become fully public?
Best wishes everyone...
Squonk. :-)
In a message dated 6/28/01 11:05:21 AM GMT Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Subj: RE: MD A fifth quality level?
Date: 6/28/01 11:05:21 AM GMT Daylight Time
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Devlin)
Sender:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ('[EMAIL PROTECTED]')
Bo said
the point is that I have come to regard the intellectual level
as the crux. Most people tend to look upon it as consciousness or
MIND (of what Pirsig calls SOM) but it should rather be regarded
as the mind/matter division itself. The very idea of a subject
observing an objective world. REASON!!!
One of the problems I have with the mind/matter division is language. We
describe an object as composed of matter outside of time itself. One of
ZAMM's helpful analogies (of which there are several) was the apriori
motorbike. After reading this it is clear that we assume that matter has a
stable structure but this is all related to time (even mountains crumble and
stars have a shelf life).
If our intellects are reticent to keep this temporal quality in mind as we
contemplate various ideas we're not going to get anywhere(as we will have
only a partial view).Perhaps the intelect obscures this temporal
quality(entropy acting?) to prevent us contemplating our own lifespan, at a
certain level that could be depressing which is not good for survival.
The intellect likes hierarchies, boxes, tables and further abstractions
but the Anahorov-Bohm effect (experimentally verified) is showing that
matter is aware of its surroundings thus showing that there is an
interrelationship that the present MOQ hierarchy doesn't address.Quantum
physics is showing that there is a point where in an experiment the observer
is affecting the observed,this leads you to consider if the mind/matter
division is a false construct (as mind could be affecting the matter it
thinks it is isolated from and if so where does that put intellect?
Quality (ie meaning,value) is stilll left strong,
Language also gives us the false impression that by giving a label to a
thing be it a tree or a metaphysics we have somehow sufficiently grasped
(intellectually) that thing. As all of us are aware in any matter there
are countless interactions happening simultaneously that our intellects have
no sensory input for yet none of these interactions appear in a metaphysics,
or if they do their meaning is only appreciated at an organic level and then
left there on the lowest rung by an intellect that may or may not like the
implications of those interactions. If intellect is the highest of the
levels in the MOQ hierarchy then why does the hormones and chemicals in the
body devastate its ability to function in a lot of individuals
(psychosomatic illness as an example of the intellect?(speculating) damaging
its body and itself to what purpose?
bye for now
sephen
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 28 June 2001 08:36
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: MD A fifth
RE: MD A fifth quality level?
Hi Stephen Devlin: STEPHEN: The intellect likes hierarchies, boxes, tables and further abstractions but the Anahorov-Bohm effect (experimentally verified) is showing that matter is aware of its surroundings thus showing that there is an interrelationship that the present MOQ hierarchy doesn't address. It's been experimentally verified that atoms are aware? That's news to me and I'm sure to others who participated recently on this site in a great debate on that very subject with some saying no way and others saying by all means or otherwise the MOQ falls apart. Could you elaborate on the Anahorov-Bohn effect and its verification? Thanks. Platt MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
Re: MD A fifth quality level?
Hello All! And thank you for the Bohm quote. I like Bohm. I am not such a big fan of the, 'Multiverse' view of quantum mechanics. However, here is a challenge from David Deutsch: To predict that future quantum computers, made to a given specification, will work in the ways I have described, one need only solve a few uncontroversial equations. But to explain exactly how they will work, some form of multiple-universe language is unavoidable. Thus quantum computers provide irresistible evidence that the multiverse is real. One especially convincing argument is provided by quantum algorithms — even more powerful than Grover’s — which calculate more intermediate results in the course of a single computation than there are atoms in the visible universe. When a quantum computer delivers the output of such a computation, we shall know that those intermediate results must have been computed somewhere, because they were needed to produce the right answer. So I issue this challenge to those who still cling to a single-universe world view: if the universe we see around us is all there is, where are quantum computations performed? I have yet to receive a plausible reply. M! What do you think? I have an intuitive feeling that our brains are active quantum computers? Danah Zohar argues for as much in, 'The quantum self.' If AI can develop an alternative quantum computer then we may be on our way to a Mind/AI integration leading to 5th level latching? Pure speculation, but fun! ;) My great sadness is that intellectual patterns of value are too often quashed in our, 'Advanced' societies. All the best, Squonk. In a message dated 6/25/01 8:00:42 PM GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: below are some quotes from an interview david bohm gave that i think show some interesting parallel's with RMP and the MOQ,the full interview has a link below the quotes so you can see them in full context.If anyone could help out I tried earlier to locate the prevoius threads on a 5th order but failed (doh). david bohm quotes: He demands that we learn to regard matter and life as a whole, coherent domain, which he calls the implicate order. Bohm is perhaps best known for his early work on the interactions of electrons in metals. He showed that their individual, haphazard movement concealed a highly organized and cooperative behavior called plasma oscillation. This intimation of an order underlying apparent chaos was pivotal in Bohm's development. In 1959 Bohm, working with Yakir Ahronov, showed that a magnetic field might alter the behavior of electrons without touching them: If two electron beams were passed on either side of a space containing a magnetic field, the field would retard the waves of one beam even though it did not penetrate the space and actually touch the electrons. This 'AB effect was verified a year later. Consciousness is unfolded in each individual. Clearly, it's shared between people as they look at one object and verify that it's the same. So any high level of consciousness is a social process. There may be some level of sensorimotor perception that is purely individual, but any abstract level depends on language, which is social. The word, which is outside, evokes the meaning, which is inside each person. Bohm: I say meaning is being! So any transformation of society must result in a profound change of meaning. Any change of meaning for the individual would change the whole because all individuals are so similar that it can be communicated. http://www.fdavidpeat.com/interviews/bohm.htm -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 June 2001 01:31 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MD A fifth quality level? In a message dated 6/22/01 8:50:02 PM GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, the fact that Intellect doesn't dominate all cultures is an important point, its age (emergence) however depends on how we define it, but the MoQ postulates that each level starts as a pattern of the former level so its birth is far far back. Intellect does not dominate all cultures, but is striving to do so (the West vs Islam conflict for instance). About the levels being blind to the upper, that's correct, but a possible movement beyond Intellect will necessarily build on Intellect - an outlandish intellectual pattern will be the seed crystal. And we who are inorganic, biological, social and intellectual will necessarily be carriers of a 5th level also. It is NOT intellect who sees this. Intellect isn't the end of evolution. Bo Hello all! I sent Bo, (if i may be excused such familiarity)! the following message to his personal e-mail address by accident, and he kindly suggested i resubmit the same: Subj: Re:%20MD%20Toffler%20waves%20or%20Q-intellectual%20evolution?In-Reply-To= 3 B1 Date: 6/21/01 To: [EMAIL
RE: MD A fifth quality level?
dreamed of developing a group mind, and spent his last years organizing dialogue circles in its pursuit. Bohm lived for the transcendental; his dreams were of the light that penetrates. From early childhood he learned to escape into the world of the mind and the imagination. Yet his life was accompanied by great personal pain and periods of crippling depression. He never achieved wholeness in his own personal life, and the fruits of that life, which are still with us, were gained only at great sacrifice. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 June 2001 20:23 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: MD A fifth quality level? Stephen Devlin, Christopher Galtenberg, Matt the Amazing...etc, and Marco . STEPHEN wrote: The line a groping 5th level caught my interest and i wanted to know if the moq is aware of research into the brain which has some parallels with moq on some levels Thanks for noticing my messages, but I'm afraid you must tell us how you see the works of Elaine Beauport or David Bohm in relation to the Quality Metaphysics, there are only Chiefs around here - no Indians (no readers just writers:-). Brain research does certainly have bearing on the MoQ ...everything has, the question is whether Beauport's intellect term parallels the Static Intellectual Level of the Metaphysics of Quality? I fear not. Re brain research my favourite in this field is the Penfield experiments (probing exposed brain evoked memories) which led to Benjamin Libet's findings. These are really weird. A possible 5th level it was once a raging topic, my take on that is that the Quality idea itself is a groping step to free evolution from Intellect's rigors, while the mainstream understanding is that the MoQ is an intellectual pattern that will replace the dominating SOM pattern. This need not be as opposing as it sounds, but it will take to long to unweil the different argument, but if interested mail me.. -- MATT THE ...etc wrote among many interesting things in his selfbiography: The most engimatic of those listed, to me, is Nietzsche. An amazing philosopher. A real asshole sometimes and (I would say) wrong about a lot of stuff, but I admire his genius and the insights he had and the biographical story surrounding all of it. I agree about Nietzsche, in my opinion he was on to something Quality-like - perhaps that was what broke him and from what he did not recover, but he was working on a manuscript called An Attempt at Revaluation of all Values! That sounds familiar? MARCO ended his excellent post thus: But you agree that intellect is not still dominating the whole world. And the beginning of dominance in the west is (according to Pirsig) less than 100 years ago. Moreover, as every level is blind to the upper levels, how can we see a possible 5th level? More likely, I'd say that it's time to extinguish the SOM dinosaur. The reptiles curve is over. Yes, the fact that Intellect doesn't dominate all cultures is an important point, its age (emergence) however depends on how we define it, but the MoQ postulates that each level starts as a pattern of the former level so its birth is far far back. Intellect does not dominate all cultures, but is striving to do so (the West vs Islam conflict for instance) . About the levels being blind to the upper, that's correct, but a possible movement beyond Intellect will necessarily build on Intellect - an outlandish intellectual pattern will be the seed crystal. And we who are inorganic, biological, social and intellectual will necessarily be carriers of a 5th level also. It is NOT intellect who sees this. Intelllect isn't the end of evolution. Bo MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html _ This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. _ This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
Re: MD A fifth quality level?
In a message dated 6/25/01 3:39:56 PM GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This effect, they argued, is central to quantum mechanics, implying that even quite distant objects can affect quantum processes. These non-local correlation's have nothing to do with traditional forms of interaction (such as by fields or the exchange of particles); rather, they demand new concepts that go beyond the ideas of separation and distance. Hello there! I have been thinking about fifth level for a while. May i thank you for your interesting thoughts? In my earlier posting, i expressed a feeling that 5th level latching may involve quantum computers? If consciousness is a quantum process then quantum computers may form coherent resonance's between AI and human mind? I assume mind is more fundamental than our mythological 'physical' aspect! :) I have always felt that Bohm's implicate order is basically Dynamic Quality, and his explicit order is static latching? Nice to chat! Squonk. MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
RE: MD A fifth quality level?
below are some quotes from an interview david bohm gave that i think show some interesting parallel's with RMP and the MOQ,the full interview has a link below the quotes so you can see them in full context.If anyone could help out I tried earlier to locate the prevoius threads on a 5th order but failed (doh). david bohm quotes: He demands that we learn to regard matter and life as a whole, coherent domain, which he calls the implicate order. Bohm is perhaps best known for his early work on the interactions of electrons in metals. He showed that their individual, haphazard movement concealed a highly organized and cooperative behavior called plasma oscillation. This intimation of an order underlying apparent chaos was pivotal in Bohm's development. In 1959 Bohm, working with Yakir Ahronov, showed that a magnetic field might alter the behavior of electrons without touching them: If two electron beams were passed on either side of a space containing a magnetic field, the field would retard the waves of one beam even though it did not penetrate the space and actually touch the electrons. This 'AB effect was verified a year later. Consciousness is unfolded in each individual. Clearly, it's shared between people as they look at one object and verify that it's the same. So any high level of consciousness is a social process. There may be some level of sensorimotor perception that is purely individual, but any abstract level depends on language, which is social. The word, which is outside, evokes the meaning, which is inside each person. Bohm: I say meaning is being! So any transformation of society must result in a profound change of meaning. Any change of meaning for the individual would change the whole because all individuals are so similar that it can be communicated. http://www.fdavidpeat.com/interviews/bohm.htm -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 June 2001 01:31 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MD A fifth quality level? In a message dated 6/22/01 8:50:02 PM GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, the fact that Intellect doesn't dominate all cultures is an important point, its age (emergence) however depends on how we define it, but the MoQ postulates that each level starts as a pattern of the former level so its birth is far far back. Intellect does not dominate all cultures, but is striving to do so (the West vs Islam conflict for instance). About the levels being blind to the upper, that's correct, but a possible movement beyond Intellect will necessarily build on Intellect - an outlandish intellectual pattern will be the seed crystal. And we who are inorganic, biological, social and intellectual will necessarily be carriers of a 5th level also. It is NOT intellect who sees this. Intellect isn't the end of evolution. Bo Hello all! I sent Bo, (if i may be excused such familiarity)! the following message to his personal e-mail address by accident, and he kindly suggested i resubmit the same: Subj: Re:%20MD%20Toffler%20waves%20or%20Q-intellectual%20evolution?In-Reply-To= 3 B1 Date: 6/21/01 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello all! I find discussion of 5th level static latching most interesting. If each level of static evolution is growing orders of magnitude above its lower level(s) then the end is almost in sight? The advent of quantum computers may trigger 5th level static latching. I have a feeling that 5th level latching will be more coherent than 4th level, as this appears to be a trend: 1st level coherent handidness. 2nd level discrete biological entities. 3rd level coherent social conglomerates. 4th level discrete digital truth. 5th level coherent emotional integration of mind and AI. (?) It saddens me that so few listings in this group are suggesting ways of improving things as they are now. Best wishes all, Squonkstail. I have a feeling that AI will be first used as an enhancement for human patterns of value. The enhancement may almost inevitably lead to emergent behaviour from an intellectual base; humans will value enhancement, but that which enhances will run off with its own evolving set of value patterns. Note that everything will appear quite rosy from our intellectual perspective? But then again, it was quite rosy from the social levels perspective at one point for intellectual patterns to enjoy an 'enhancing' role? My point about coherence is a feeling i have that 5th level latching may be global? I envisage a 'ghost' world inhabited by virtual personalities. Virtual personalities to us, but something quite unintelligible in its own way? Maybe it has already begun my friends? Intellectual values hinge upon truth; and truth is black or white, on/off, yes/no, take it or leave it. I should like to further stress the particle/wave/particle ... flow of level into level. Of course, i use these terms as a convenient analogy; i in no way wish to imply anything
MD A fifth quality level?
Stephen Devlin, Christopher Galtenberg, Matt the Amazing...etc, and Marco . STEPHEN wrote: The line a groping 5th level caught my interest and i wanted to know if the moq is aware of research into the brain which has some parallels with moq on some levels Thanks for noticing my messages, but I'm afraid you must tell us how you see the works of Elaine Beauport or David Bohm in relation to the Quality Metaphysics, there are only Chiefs around here - no Indians (no readers just writers:-). Brain research does certainly have bearing on the MoQ ...everything has, the question is whether Beauport's intellect term parallels the Static Intellectual Level of the Metaphysics of Quality? I fear not. Re brain research my favourite in this field is the Penfield experiments (probing exposed brain evoked memories) which led to Benjamin Libet's findings. These are really weird. A possible 5th level it was once a raging topic, my take on that is that the Quality idea itself is a groping step to free evolution from Intellect's rigors, while the mainstream understanding is that the MoQ is an intellectual pattern that will replace the dominating SOM pattern. This need not be as opposing as it sounds, but it will take to long to unweil the different argument, but if interested mail me.. -- MATT THE ...etc wrote among many interesting things in his selfbiography: The most engimatic of those listed, to me, is Nietzsche. An amazing philosopher. A real asshole sometimes and (I would say) wrong about a lot of stuff, but I admire his genius and the insights he had and the biographical story surrounding all of it. I agree about Nietzsche, in my opinion he was on to something Quality-like - perhaps that was what broke him and from what he did not recover, but he was working on a manuscript called An Attempt at Revaluation of all Values! That sounds familiar? MARCO ended his excellent post thus: But you agree that intellect is not still dominating the whole world. And the beginning of dominance in the west is (according to Pirsig) less than 100 years ago. Moreover, as every level is blind to the upper levels, how can we see a possible 5th level? More likely, I'd say that it's time to extinguish the SOM dinosaur. The reptiles curve is over. Yes, the fact that Intellect doesn't dominate all cultures is an important point, its age (emergence) however depends on how we define it, but the MoQ postulates that each level starts as a pattern of the former level so its birth is far far back. Intellect does not dominate all cultures, but is striving to do so (the West vs Islam conflict for instance) . About the levels being blind to the upper, that's correct, but a possible movement beyond Intellect will necessarily build on Intellect - an outlandish intellectual pattern will be the seed crystal. And we who are inorganic, biological, social and intellectual will necessarily be carriers of a 5th level also. It is NOT intellect who sees this. Intelllect isn't the end of evolution. Bo MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
Re: MD A fifth quality level?
In a message dated 6/22/01 8:50:02 PM GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, the fact that Intellect doesn't dominate all cultures is an important point, its age (emergence) however depends on how we define it, but the MoQ postulates that each level starts as a pattern of the former level so its birth is far far back. Intellect does not dominate all cultures, but is striving to do so (the West vs Islam conflict for instance). About the levels being blind to the upper, that's correct, but a possible movement beyond Intellect will necessarily build on Intellect - an outlandish intellectual pattern will be the seed crystal. And we who are inorganic, biological, social and intellectual will necessarily be carriers of a 5th level also. It is NOT intellect who sees this. Intellect isn't the end of evolution. Bo Hello all! I sent Bo, (if i may be excused such familiarity)! the following message to his personal e-mail address by accident, and he kindly suggested i resubmit the same: Subj: Re:%20MD%20Toffler%20waves%20or%20Q-intellectual%20evolution?In-Reply-To=3 B1 Date: 6/21/01 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello all! I find discussion of 5th level static latching most interesting. If each level of static evolution is growing orders of magnitude above its lower level(s) then the end is almost in sight? The advent of quantum computers may trigger 5th level static latching. I have a feeling that 5th level latching will be more coherent than 4th level, as this appears to be a trend: 1st level coherent handidness. 2nd level discrete biological entities. 3rd level coherent social conglomerates. 4th level discrete digital truth. 5th level coherent emotional integration of mind and AI. (?) It saddens me that so few listings in this group are suggesting ways of improving things as they are now. Best wishes all, Squonkstail. I have a feeling that AI will be first used as an enhancement for human patterns of value. The enhancement may almost inevitably lead to emergent behaviour from an intellectual base; humans will value enhancement, but that which enhances will run off with its own evolving set of value patterns. Note that everything will appear quite rosy from our intellectual perspective? But then again, it was quite rosy from the social levels perspective at one point for intellectual patterns to enjoy an 'enhancing' role? My point about coherence is a feeling i have that 5th level latching may be global? I envisage a 'ghost' world inhabited by virtual personalities. Virtual personalities to us, but something quite unintelligible in its own way? Maybe it has already begun my friends? Intellectual values hinge upon truth; and truth is black or white, on/off, yes/no, take it or leave it. I should like to further stress the particle/wave/particle ... flow of level into level. Of course, i use these terms as a convenient analogy; i in no way wish to imply anything more than that. One may also see value in a one/many analogy? or my own, discrete/coherence analogy? Cheers! Squonkstail. MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
