> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]On Behalf Of Johannes Volmert
> Sent: Sunday, 26 November 2000 5:21
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Subject: Re: MD Inconsistency, Incompleteness and MetaMemeMapping.
>
>
> Hi Chris, hi all,
>
> Chris Lofting wrote:
> >
> > The moment Godel made the distinction of Complete from incomplete, the
> > moment Heisenberg made the distinction of certain from
> uncertain, they both
> > demonstrated properties of the neurologically sourced METHOD of
> analysis,
> > namely applying dichotomies recursively.
> >
> > The moment you assert X/~X, and then try to 'refine' this
> assertion when you
> > discover that things seem not to be so 'black and white', you
> entangle the
> > elements of the dichotomy such that you build-in
> uncertainty/incompleteness
> > as properties of the thing under analysis.
>
> [...]
>
> I find your articles always very fascinating, and they partly had
> given impulse
> to my 'system'-concept, in which I try to generalize this idea in
> effort to
> structure Pirsigs level, besides this is still quite vague to me.
> It takes me always at least two times of reading, to get the
> meaning, which has
> obviously nothing to do with the structure and the language of
> your posts, and
> so I try to understand on my own.
I am 'intense' in writing and so you may need to read it a few times! .. the
intensity leads to making associations that seem as if I am jumping
around!... I am working on the problem :-)
> One question I still have about your 'X/~X-notion'. Should that mean -
> concerning your thoughts about the influence of dichotomies - A
> human being is
> differentiating between a thing X and everything else, which is
> obviously not X
> (~X). Can one consider ~X as the complement to X; so the amount of all
> observable, only X substracted?
>
Yes, the processes seem to start with an oppositional emphasis that can lead
to a cooperative emphasis.
In the brain the X is included in the ~X but as a member of the set of all
possible expressions, it lacks the intensity that defines the actual
expression of X. Thus ~X is like a list of words, a lexicon (or at a higher
level a discipline) and we copy one of those out to become the particular
context we will use for interpretation of something.
The METHOD of interpretation includes an oppositional approach (very
archetypal, emphasis on purity, asexual/androgyne reproduction -- fractals?
Internal linkage, 'us' vs 'them', immortal, eternal, no change) which gives
way to a cooperative approach (very typal, emphasis on genetic diversity,
sexual reproduction. External linkage, 'us' AND 'them'. The price for this
is the loss of immortality and change dominates.)
best,
Chris.
------------------
Chris Lofting
websites:
http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond
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 - 16:00:51 BST