On 20 Nov 2000, at 12:55, Richard Edgar wrote:
> I'm not sure if this is a private discussion and as such I should not
> be getting involved, but something Dan wrote concerns me.
Hi Richard
No privacy around here :-) anyone may mingle in any thread, and I
will drop a line on this issue too.
> Dan wrote:
> > If we equate memes with patterns of value, then all four levels
> > "have" memes, but the lower level memes are separated from intellect
> > by the social level, thus we are unaware of them.
> Does the social level really mean we are unaware of the lower levels
> of value??
I agree with you, but Dan's message is (perhaps) that the
Intellectual level is inattentive because it is preoccupied with its
parent level - society. The message from me however is that the
term "aware " (in a SOM sense), keeps scewing up the he issue.
We -(as a "jungle of levels") are aware when focus shifts. When
Dan cut himself with the chaisaw (his) biology came to the fore -
intermingled with awareness of other Q-planes.
> As law-abiding human beings (as i am sure you all are),
> why do we not commit crimes against our organic values?
...not commit crimes against OUR organic values? I don't quite get
that, but if you mean that suicide is unacceptable thanks to the
social value you are right. The only cause the individual is
supposed to die for is Society's preservation, but this is not defined
as suicide - merely duty - as in ancient times when the old and
infirm wandered out in the wilderness. Just horrible seen from
Intellect: Duty from Society. ("society" not a country or a state or
anything like that but Social Value)
> is it because society tells us not to and our intellect agrees (as > Dan seems to be
> saying)
I suspect that I am completely beside your reasoning, but to
continue in my own rut. Intellect does not agree with society on
anything, the level below itself is EVIL to all levels, so (regarding
the suicide issue) what intellect abhors is Society's right to
demand killing of self or other.
> or is it that the intellect allows us to perform our own
> evaluations of the situations giving rise to social law? I.E. our
> intellect allows us to make our own mind up about what is right
> and wrong and thus to challenge the outdated laws society has
> flung upon us.
"Social law" is not dependent upon any accentuated Intellectual
level. LAW - written or unwritten - IS society, but the law may be
intellect-influenced in a culture dominated by intellectual values. In
the same way that social value may influence biological life to a
great degree.
> I believe that society does not block the path between the intellect
> and the inorganic values, but rather that the intellect allows us to
> re-evaluate the role of society within the framework of organic
> values. Only by discrediting the society value system can we truly
> become a species with an intellectual value system.
I think you are right - if I understand you correctly. That is: Intellect
join forces with Bilogy in its struggle with Society (LILA). Only by
discrediting ..etc. is correct.
> As an example, take a crime against the organic value system. Serious
> assault. In the organic value system assault is bad, the society
> value system then says assaults are committed by people who shouldn't
> be allowed to assault so they should be locked up or sent away from
> the rest of society. The intellect however, argues that since all
> organic systems should be treated equally, and thus the criminal
> should be rehabilitated, made to understand his or her crime and
> allowed to live with a normal life once he or she is able to do so
> without hurting others. So here, the intellect has applied itself to
> the organic value system to change societies wrong doers and allow
> them to live decent lives.
This is a bit unclear. "Assault against the organic value system"?
In what sense and context? At the Organic level there is no greater
value than "assaults": Kill, avoiding being killed, eating, copulation.
There isn't any "human organic value level", our safety from the dog-
kills-dog existence is due to social value controlling biological
value, but our CIVILIZED manners are due to the Intellectual
controlling social value.
> If this system has value, then doesn't the whole business of "is a
> copy of experience the same as experience?" needs a new factor
> introducing, that being "What is the role of a DERIVED experience on
> the value system?" Analogous to this in the above example, the people
> deciding the new laws based on justice for all are not the victims of
> the crime so how can they be involved in the situation outlined? If
> you are going to talk about experience, you should include derived
> experience as this is the leading factor of the intellectual value
> system.
The copy issue is Dan's table :-)
> Apologies if i have duplicated past arguments,
Likewise.
Bo
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:50 BST