[John]
All I'm saying Arlo, is that I don't read the MoQ as a map. I read the
MoQ as a compass. I'll make my own map, thank you.
[Arlo]
Which is effect what we all do, really. We are all part of the larger
historical dialogue, and from that we listen and we speak and we try to
make sense of
[Mark]
My point was that a description of Quality, or God, or whatever, is a
subjective description.
[Arlo]
Curious, as I don't recall your answer to a previous question, when you
say Quality, God or whatever, what other terms would you find
synonymous, and do you feel the commonality of
[Mark]
There is but one Quality and Pirsig is its Prophet
[Arlo]
There is one Quality, I'd say, although a quantifier seems odd. I think
its better to just say 'there is Quality'. Are you suggesting there are
multiple 'Qualities' at the first metaphysical level? So Pirsig divided
one Quality
[John]
The objective truth is the MoQ as described by Pirsig, eh? Hogwash!
[Arlo]
Pirsig did not describe the MOQ, what he described was Quality, and he
called his description The Metaphysics OF Quality.
Is Pirsig's description objective truth? Of course not. Asking whether
Pirsig is true
[Craig]
So rather than respond to your response to what I didn't mean to say,
I'll start over:
[Arlo]
Fair enough, nice talking to you again.
[Craig]
So I think Pirsig himself would say that the MoQ is not identical to or
limited to his view.
[Arlo]
Let me stop and ask, do you think there
[Ant]
As such, when you or I say the MOQ states I'd regard that as
referring to our own individual interpretations of the MOQ.
[Arlo]
Of course, when we are stating our own interpretations there isn't a
'right/wrong' condition. If I say I interpret the MOQ to include X,
you can say you
[Arlo asked]
Can Pirsig be wrong about the MOQ?
[Craig]
Consider 3 different points of reference: a) inconsistencies b) logical
consequences c) undecidables
[Arlo]
Hi Craig. Note that I didn't ask Can Pirsig be wrong?, the question I
asked is a fulcrum point whose answer is based is on how
[Mark]
Here we try to separate belief from faith. Belief would be
something that we continually need to justify, whereas faith we do not.
[Arlo]
This is interesting, would you say then that 'doubt' is a part of
'belief'? That is how I read this, that 'certainty' would be 'faith',
whereas
Ant/Mark,
Greetings. Since some of this touches on ideas I am interested in, I am
interjecting a few comments/questions.
[Mark]
This whole concept of faith is also one that tends towards
distortion. People have faith in science as well, to the point where
they believe what scientists tell
[John]
But the fact that you bring up the subject, long after the protagonists
of theism have given up and fled, is a clue to something that must be
going on in your own head.
[Arlo]
Apparently they have not 'fled', John.
[John]
... is a clue to something that must be going on in your own
[Arlo previously]
Since the MOQ is anti-theistic, and it opposes SOM, this statement is
about as gross a misunderstanding of the MOQ as I've seen. But this just
proves my point.
[John]
Really? How so?
[Arlo]
Pirsig himself says his philosophy is anti-theistic. The only way it
could be
[Steve to Marsha]
Why would an MOQer even want to wield an SOM-laden term like
relativism? It is half of the old SOM Platypus, relativism/absolutism.
It is a term based on an SOM premise that we deny. It is just another
version of the wrong-headed question, is the Quality in the subject or
in
[Marsha]
And I might think some are bending over backwards, due to a cultural and
personal bias, to reject a term, in its epistemological connotation,
that is in common use within an Eastern explanation . Including the term
help establish the bridge between East and West. imho.
[Arlo]
If
[Marsha]
When you wrote 'historical philosophical conversation', weren't you
limiting the statement to Western-centric historical philosophical
conversation? I am interested in exploring the relationship between
Buddhism and the MoQ.
[Arlo]
I do not speak any Eastern languages, nor am I
[Marsha]
And that opinion is relative to your pattern life history. I will
continue to follow my interest in the relationship between the MoQ and
Buddhism based on my pattern life history and immediate experience.
[Arlo]
In other words, if you want to bury your head in the sand, that's your
[Mark]
Now, you may say that a Ph.D in Biotechnology is not a degree in
Philosophy. However, you would be mistaken since any of the sciences are
considered philosophies.
[Arlo]
Again, I'm at a loss for any other 'degree' that's so denigrated as a
degree in philosophy. If I told you I had a
[Steve]
So maybe a better question for the artist to replace, what does this
painting mean? is, is there anything you could tell me about this
painting that may help me to appreciate it?
[Arlo]
The problem with the first question, as Manson I think gets at, is that
it implies there is a
[Marsha]
My questioning 'essay' was more in the nature of it being an analytical
composition, which seems more intent on providing meaning, but I could
be wrong. I do agree with the comments on ZAMM.
[Arlo]
Analytical composition can be art, indeed SHOULD be art. No? Anyway,
your other
[Mark]
I often ask my self where my ideas come from.
[Arlo]
This is basically the same question Phaedrus asked himself about the
origins of hypotheses, and led him towards Poincare and Einstein.
Although he doesn't mention them, both Eco and Peirce posit very similar
answers, as does
[Arlo previously]
This is basically the same question Phaedrus asked himself about the
origins of hypotheses, and led him towards Poincare and Einstein.
Although he doesn't mention them, both Eco and Peirce posit very similar
answers, as does Nietzsche (and Dewey, and Northrop and James).
[Mark]
One of my interests is drawing in the masses, as I try to do in
conversations outside of this forum.
[Arlo]
What I like about Nietzsche (among other things) is that he not only
breaks from the tradition of defining 'art' as 'that painting on the
wall over there', but suggests the
[DMB]
Have you ever been that particular kind of drunk wherein you have that
mystic feeling of Oneness? I have. It's easy to imagine why the
ancients thought of it as a the power of a god, as a divine gift.
[Arlo]
No doubt. There is a book called Supernatural by Graham Hancock you
might want
Hi All,
Just some more thoughts on Nietzsche Apollonian/Dionysian dialectic,
these will get shorter as I'm not really laying out any sort of exact
mapping here. My working map begins something like Apollonian equates
with the static intellectual level and Dionysian with Pirsig's
All,
Accepting the risk of setting off some nihilism frothing, I've been
re-reading Nietzsche's The Birth of Tragedy recently, and thought I'd
share some passages that struck me as resonating with the SQ/DQ division
of the MOQ.
I'm not making any general claims about Nietzsche or that this
[Steve]
But I think the terms free will, determinism, agency, structure,
dynamic, and static are relatable, in the sense that we can compare
and contrast usages.
[Arlo]
I think its possible to compare theories of free-will/determinism to
theories of agency/structure (and to theories of
[Ham]
In this way you, Arlo, and others may see that I am not here to condemn
the MoQ, nor am I totally antagonistic toward Pirsig's tenets.
[Ham later in same post]
This is, in fact, the fundamental fundamental premise of Essentialism.
Unfortunately, it is missing (possibly hidden?) in
[Ham]
Really, Arlo? If you can explain experience in the absence of a
sensible agent, you'll be doing RMP and the rest of us a momentous favor.
[Arlo]
I'm not going to waste time with your disingenous question, Ham. This is
like a flat-earther asking for proof the earth is round. You've
[Steve]
I appreciate your response. I especially liked your analogy of having
free will in the conventional sense that we say someone has ADD, but I
think there is an important possible difference.
[Arlo]
Well, no analogy is perfect. :-)
[Steve]
We can certainly understand ADD pragmatically
[Steve]
For [DMB] the terms [agency/freedom] are mutually exclusive with
determinism. How would you distinguish these terms?
[Arlo]
Again, I'm not following your entire dialogue with DMB, so I can't make
a comment about that (I do flag all posts that reference me by name).
I think agency
[Arlo to Dan]
I'd say that seeing free will as some existential out there thing
that floats around and controls experience is certainly an illusion. But
the concept of free will is an intellectual pattern of value, a way we
explain and make sense of our experience.
[Steve]
I agree, but I
[Ian]
They only added the qualifier conventional after you've discovered
it's not the actual scientific knowledge - with hindsight.
[Arlo]
You know, I was going to say that this is evidence of an S/O distinction
in our culture, but I wonder if a more accurate comparison would be to
two of
[Ian]
Conventional = wrong anyway, doesn't it ?
[Arlo]
How so?
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
[DMB]
I mean we cannot rightly say that all actions are moral and some
actions are downright immoral.
[Arlo]
Patterns only become immoral in contrast/context to/with other
patterns. A virus does not act immorally, the immorality derives from
the perspective of the higher pattern with which
[Craig]
Everything has a value: some high (good), some low (bad).
[Arlo]
Well, again, I think the high/low only comes from to other patterns.
No pattern in isolation (if that's possible) has low value, the very
fact that it is a stable pattern of activity indicates it has value,
otherwise it
[DMB]
Right. Sociopaths and psychopaths are both forms of anti-social
personality disorder but the latter is more severe.
[Arlo]
I am surprised there is no distinction, I've always used the terms
(erroneously now, I see) in the sense that a psychopath understands
that what he is doing is
If you are referring to the human physiology in 1, then...
1) Biological patterns tend towards an increase in complexity over time.
2) :. There were less complex biological patterns before there were more
complex ones.
If you are referring to human activity in 1, then...
1) Social patterns
[Horse]
And if this 'autonomous individual self ' is illusory then the
conventional way of looking at free will is also illusory.
[Arlo]
The way I see it, free will is intellectual pattern we use in an
attempt to describe experience. Like polar coordinates, it can be
useful or not, and
[Marsha]
Yes, but Ms. Albahari's investigation is whether the 'sense of self'
does, in fact, reflect a real 'self'. A far more important investigation
consider that RMP rejects an autonomous self.
[Arlo]
You keep repeating this, Marsha, and I don't know why. I am not
interested in the
[Marsha]
While the way discussion has been framed, the 'self' does seem to be an
intellectual static pattern of value. But I'd like to remind you that
within the MoQ the self is also a collection of organic, biological,
social and intellectual static patterns of value:
[Arlo]
This isn't
[Marsha]
RMP does, in fact, state that it is an illusion.
[Arlo]
Right, Marsha, he states the autonomous self is an illusion, because
the autonomous self is a product of S/O thinking.
But if you move up to a MOQ perspective, there are NO illusions OR
existants, there are patterns of value.
[Ian]
I just don't see Keller referenced much in the many brain development /
mental development texts I have read in recent years.)
[Arlo]
I suspect a large part of that is the absence of corresponding brain
imaging that was not available in her day. If one comes at the question
from a
[Arlo previously]
I'd say he's just plain right about this, literally or figuratively.
This is the basic evolutionary hierarchy of his ideas.
[MRB]
So how do evolutionary-psychological come in? They're pretty
fundamental, e.g. around mating.
[Arlo]
I don't understand your question. Mating?
[Ian]
So the previous social pattern isn't fossilized in all its glory in the
future biology, but it does preserve traces / shadows, which reinforce
the advantage on the next cycle, and so on.
[Arlo]
But clearly you mean that these traces/shadows are recorded in some form
of genetic sequence
[Ian]
In the same way as biological patterns can be fossilized in the
physical. Social (and intellectual) patterns can be fossilized in the
biological.
[Arlo]
I have no doubt that intellectual activity shapes the trajectory of
social evolution, and social activity shapes the trajectory of
[Ian]
But basically, I still don't agree with the rest ... the example
evidence is I believe being misinterpreted ... ironically, in too
reductionist a way
[Arlo]
Yes, there is some irony in that charge.
By fossilizing, I assume you mean that social/intellectual structures
or patterns are
[Marsha]
I agree that the concept of 'thinking' is an intellectual pattern. But I
thought it was stated, somewhere, that the activity of thinking
indicated the intellectual level.
[Arlo]
How would you define thinking? Or, what activity would you witness
and point to and say that's
2:04 PM, MarshaV wrote:
Hello Arlo,
On Aug 3, 2011, at 1:20 PM, Arlo Bensinger wrote:
[Marsha]
I agree that the concept of 'thinking' is an intellectual pattern. But I
thought it was stated, somewhere, that the activity of thinking indicated the
intellectual level.
[Arlo]
How would you
[Ian]
... but the underlying love of the human has to still be there or there
is little point (value) to the communications.
[Arlo]
There are more reasons one can value posting other than love of other
person, no?
I'd like to share a quick anecdote.
A friend of mine relocated his family to
[Marsha]
Many people have weighed in on this issue. It was never confined to a
debate between just Steve and dmb.
[Arlo]
My comments had nothing whatsoever to do with the thread on free
will/determinism (believe me, if they did you would know it). My
comments were in response to Dan's
Some segments from Chapter III, The Free Culture of the United
States. I've skipped a bit to present a line of thought directly
foregrounding Pirsig, namely the appearance of SOM as the dominant
intellectual pattern of the United States. Northrop briefly touches
upon Aristotle, but goes into
Another Chapter Two segment, with some inserts [mine] for clarity. I
think this foreshadows the core of the romantic/classic ideas
presented in ZMM. As John mentions, there is also a dialogue relating
to Native Indian values versus European values (although
interestingly Northrop traces the
My summer project (one of them) this year is to digitize Northrop's
The Meeting of East and West (or at least get this well underway).
Here is an interesting segment from Chapter Two The Rich Culture of Mexico...
The criticism is that a philosophy of life which shuts its eyes to
the creative
[Marsha]
Have you had the experience of a feral human?
[Arlo]
I've not had experience as a rock either, but it doesn't take much
empirical observation to know that I have a greater range of agency than one.
I see you're trying to drag this down into your typical nonsense
games. Have fun with
[Marsha]
Talk about stating extremes... Your comments are better than a poke
in the eye with a sharp stick, and just as exaggerated.
[Arlo]
Just responding in kind...
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
[Marsha]
Are a human having assimilating language against a feral human the
only two choices.
[Arlo]
Do you have a third choice?
[Marsha]
Does your theory hinge on this type of exaggeration?
[Arlo]
Give me some other options and I'll let you know. Seems to me that,
within a MOQ, the path is
[Marsha]
Mark has it right, words are a kind of imprisonment.
[Arlo]
Mark, and you, have it half-right. No one said language was not
constraining, not me, not any of the structuration theorists I
mentioned. Of course it is. So you if focus on *that*, of course
words can seem like a prison.
[Marsha]
You are correct, and I am a very conventional woman. Yes, some of
this conventional chit-chat is good.
[Arlo]
I think language gives us a lot more than conventional chit chat.
Supermarkets, farming, poetry, global travel, plumbing, heating,
motorcycles, games, books, etc etc. I
[Marsha]
Statically increased, as Dan reminded us: To the extent that one's
behavior is controlled by static patterns of quality it is without
choice. But to the extent that one follows Dynamic Quality, which is
undefinable, one's behavior is free. [LILA}
[Arlo]
No, not just statically
[Marsha]
Would you please define 'agency' as you are using it so there is no
quibbling about the term.
[Arlo]
Has there been quibbling? Broadly, agency refers to capacity to
act, it is defined by range of possibility an actor has at any given
point in time. I use the term because freedom and
[Marsha]
Is this about an autonomous individual?
[Arlo]
No. In this paragraph the author is stating the extremes, or poles,
of structure (determinism?) and agency (free will?). There have
been other terms for these, but within structuration theories (such
as Giddens, Archer, Parker and
[Mark]
Freedom is a rig full of gas, a wide open road, a stack of audio CDs,
and some sweet rock and roll. Oh, yeah, and truck stops full of
coffee. Just watch out for the ones full of Vampires...
[Arlo]
A nice metaphor for freedom, since the agency one is able to act
upon above is
[Horse]
MoQ static patterns are no more or less real than subjects and
objects (in my view) - they are used to represent experience and not
experience itself (DQ).
[Arlo]
Hi Horse. I think we are on the same page, I am (again) perhaps
quibbling over minutia, but that's where I am these days.
[John]
Thus his wider conversation would not be called the MoQ, he'd
term it Qualityism. I don't agree that this is the best approach,
but I do agree that he has a good point and that the clarification of
an ambiguity is usually a good thing.
[Arlo]
Yeah, I don't necessarily think
[DMB]
I think that we can have the MOQ in the strict sense and a wider
conversation about Pirsig's ideas.
[Arlo]
Well, I think so too. I mean, it seems to me this is how it works for
all ideas. We can discuss what James said or what Peirce said or
what Pirsig said, and we can discuss the
[Dan]
And I realize you can both say that it is only my interpretation of
the MOQ and that your interpretation is just as valid. I think Arlo
recently argued that point with me.
[Arlo]
To clarify, I specifically (and repeatedly) have argued AGAINST the
interpretist take. But I must've not
[Dan]
In our last discussion, you seemed to be saying all interpretions are equal.
[Arlo]
I was arguing against the idea of interpretation altogether.
[Dan]
Now, this is where I see you arguing for some sort of interpretive
legitimacy that stands above and beyond what the MOQ is saying. It
[Marsha]
In general, I think that you may be missing that not everybody thinks
that language is as important as you do.
[Arlo]
Language is a large part of how we communicate. When most people
speak, their goal is clarity and precision as they work to
communicate their ideas with others. But
[Marsha]
It is my goal, but I am well aware of the problems.
[Arlo]
There are always barriers to communication. Sadly, you don't move
towards clarity, you run in the other direction.
[Marsha]
The MoQ as an intellectual pattern of value, is an analogy no matter
how it conceptualized.
[Arlo]
[Marsha]
Saying IT does anything misrepresents.
[Arlo]
My point exactly. Saying The MOQ speaks (apart from a poetic
narrative) misrepresents. Thanks. Or is this a case of now saying
The MOQ says is okay, but it says is not? (Pirsig also uses the
rhetoric it says in his narrative, btw.)
[Marsha]
It makes no difference to me. Either is fine with me. It seems
trivial to me the way you present it.
[Arlo]
It would be trivial, if we speaking simply of the narrative device.
Sadly, we are not. Your continued investment here means you do NOT
think the distinction is trivial,
[Marsha]
It seemed that Arlo was address Pirsig says as an inherently
existing self, which he is not.
[Arlo]
Are you suggesting that Pirsig does not exist, and for this reason
can't speak? Who speaks, then, if not Pirsig (and you, and me,
and...)? Should I not attribute your words here to
[Marsha]
I am stating that RMP does not inherently (independently) exist. He
exists as a collection of conceptually constructed, interdependent
static patterns of value.
[Arlo]
Given this, what is the problem with saying Pirsig says...?
[Marsha]
I do not know of anything that inherently
[Marsha]
They are both static value, on what basis are you
differentiating? You point doesn't make sense to me from a MoQ perspective.
[Arlo]
On the same basis I differentiate between Arlo says and The chair
says. One speaks, one does not.
Yes, The MOQ and Pirsig are both patterns of
[Dan]
Yes. It speaks to me. I am attracted to the MOQ by more than the
words written in a book.
[Arlo]
What else has it said to you, other than the words written in the
books? Can you give me an example of something The MOQ says, but
Pirsig did not?
[Dan]
It explains reality better than
[Marsha]
The chair does not represent an intellectual static pattern of value.
[Arlo]
Fair enough.
[Marsha]
Speaking is a static pattern of value interrelated to the collection
of patterns named Pirsig.
[Arlo]
Thanks for agreeing with me.
[Marsha]
The understanding of a person being a
[Marsha]
RMP is a collection of inorganic, biological, social and intellectual
static patterns of value. Makes no sense to compare the knee pattern
or liver patterns to the intellectual patterns that relates to the MoQ.
[Arlo]
Does it make sense to put your name above those words, or does
[Marsha]
Me, you and Pirsig are a fiction.
[Arlo]
Okay. Is The MOQ a fiction as well? Should we take something more
seriously if The MOQ says it, than if Pirsig says it?
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
[Dan]
Yes you have a point. Still, if other authors subscribe to pragmatism
they should certainly give James his due credit and build on his
work, rather than misinterpreting it into something it is not.
[Arlo]
I absolutely agree. This is precisely what I had been saying in the
[Marsha had said]
Me, you and Pirsig are a fiction.
[Arlo asked]
Okay. Is The MOQ a fiction as well? Should we take something more
seriously if The MOQ says it, than if Pirsig says it?
[Marsha]
The MoQ is an intellectual static pattern of value. A very good one,
a keeper. The inherently
[Dan]
I guess that is why I tend to use the terminology the MOQ says
rather than RMP says. And yes, in a conventional, static
intellectual quality sense, Robert Pirsig DID say it. But in order
for the MOQ to evolve, I think he saw that he had to (in a Dynamic
Quality sense) let go of it.
[Mary]
That would be fun for me, but the bigger question you pose is deeper
as it relates to how we react to each other here in the MD.
[Arlo]
Its interesting to note that if you really look at the most heated
exchanges in the MD, they nearly always are not about substantive
issues but about
[Ian]
No-one not even Mary (or Ron or Marsha or John, or whoever) is
arguing for total subjectivism.
[Arlo]
Of course not, I think this has been part of my point, but the
question (to them) I've posed is at what point does something cease
being something we can ascribe to an author? How do
[Marsha]
This sentence was not mine, but a part of an Atwood quote. - See,
already you misinterpret for your own benefit. Not playing...
[Arlo]
I expected your typical bombast of denials and evasions, no surprise
there. You are correct, though, although I had no malicious motive to
[Marsha]
Do you have a source for ther quote it's all interpretation? I
never made such a statement.
[Arlo]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes
I apologize this use of quotes in this context disrupts your ability
to comprehend the text. I would've opted for singular quotes, but
[Marsha]
Right,,, put into quotes for aesthetic reasons? Not for
misrepresenting the idea as mine. ???
[Arlo]
I knew you were not asking for clarification as much as you were
seeking some way to foist a paranoiac accusation of malicious intent.
Lacking any real substantive or argumentative
[Marsha]
You misrepresent what I say, what I think, what I believe and my experience.
[Arlo]
If I've misrepresented anything, perhaps you could clarify, then,
what you think of interpretation and its role in such sentences as:
It wasn't a question, and is more a matter of interpretation and
[DMB]
Can anyone tell me how to indicate EMPHASIS in a sentence without
using italics, underlining or anything like that? I wish there was a
clear and simple way to emphasize a particular WORD within a
sentence. The idea is to make the central point really POP OUT at the
reader. But I just
[John to Ron]
I noticed that freewill is Quality. ... Has anybody noticed?
[Arlo]
I don't think I'd phrase it like this. You *might* be able to pull
off an analogy like DQ=free will/ SQ=determinism, but I think even
that is cumbersome and largely erroneous because of the meaning of these
[John]
The point I was trying to make, Arlo, is that according to the normal
vernacular, quality IS an adjective that can be applied to certain things.
[Arlo]
Right, and if you want someone to understand a MOQ, you need to
explain to them that this is wrong. You impede understanding by
[John]
I agree Arlo. But all the weight of the endeavor falls upon when
articulated. And when I articulate, I'm trying to be understood, in
plain terms of common understanding. ... So what is it that we all
experience, and even describe to one another as a quality
experience. By this, we
[Marsha]
I hope Arlo does not mind me reposting it; I only save posts I think
are the most brilliant.
[Arlo]
Arlo doesn't mind, although since I was not a part of your
disagreement with DMB, I am not sure what kind of HA! John thinks
this conveys, but oh well. Nor am I sure your point?
But
[Dan]
I would issue a caution that Dynamic Quality cannot be understood in
an intellectual sense. It comes before intellectualization. I
understand you to say by ever-changing that Dynamic Quality is not
this, not that. And that's okay. But it should be stressed that
change as we understand
[Marsha]
My heart is aching for the people in Japan. ... The question 'Why?'
sticks in my throat and I choke.
[Arlo]
The inorganic level operates with indifference (or more precisely,
with unknowning) towards the biological (and social, intellectual)
level. On the inorganic level, all that
[DMB]
The geometric analogies just don't compute for
me. ... I mean, the kind of Quality Pirsig is
talking about is more like the overall feel, the
aesthetic charge of a the whole situation.
[Arlo]
I agree. I mention field as a geometric analogy
I'd be more comfortable with than line or
[John]
Think of it this way, Arlo, from our perspective on this planet, the
whole universe is rapidly expanding away from us. Now is that some
weird sort of cosmic coincidence, or a value-orientation of necessity?
[Arlo]
I think many people find value in the notion that the entirety of the
[DMB]
Okay, I think that's the crux of it. Maybe a good analogy here would
be positive and negative magnetic charges. In that case the positive
charge attracts and the negative charge repels. ... Moving off the
stove or away from the acid is to be pushed away from the low value
situation. Or
[John]
This issue dates way, way back to a problem I had with the conflation
of two different connotations of the word Quality. Is it a line? Or a vector?
According to you, and dmb way back then, and according to you now -
the whole MoQ, it's a line. According to me and Platt, it's a vector.
Tom Waits writes and performs briliantly. Next stop, Nick Cave.
Although I have to put a nod out to Johnny Lydon's attitude about
music awards ceremonies... ;-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCgbRS2LrHY
Arlo
At 12:21 PM 3/14/2011, you wrote:
Ask not for whom the Tom Waits, the Tom Waits
[John]
But I'm thinking then, by using the term experience of Quality in
the way that I do... You get that I mean it was subjectively to me, a
good experience - I enjoyed it.
[Arlo]
An experience of Quality can also be a low-value experience.
Falling into a vat of acid is an experience of
[DMB]
Hubert Dreyfus has been a critic of artificial intelligence research
since the 1960s.
[Arlo]
Someone had mentioned this before (Ian?), but I think the construct
of artificial intelligence is a misnomer; intelligence is
intelligence. Period. The idea of artificial intelligence more
1 - 100 of 1071 matches
Mail list logo
