Hi Gerhard,
> I'm trying desperately to read most of the posts on this list, and also try
> to do some digging in the archive. So I might quote you wrong or make
> reference to something very old. The important thing, you wrote (6. july
> 2001 19:24):
> >Particularly, the social level is about those behavior that make it
> possible for alive beings to live >together: Language, Rituals, Politics,
> Economy, Giants.
> ... and I agree wholeheartedly. I must have skipped this e-mail at the time.
> Apologise for bringing in old stuff.
I'm delighted and (too much) proud that you are studying all that. No problem
about old stuff, just I'm a little worried for some silliness I wrote... Let me
say that many of these things are not really *statements*. They are more *stones
in the pond*, just to see the effects.
> Earlier, during the Levels discussion January 2001, you wrote
> (http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_focus/0101/0005.html) :
> >Pirsig gives us the example of DNA, as the inorganic "machine code" for the
> biological patterns.
> >Possible "machine codes" for the other levels:
> >EMOTIONS for the social level.
> >LANGUAGE for the intellectual level.
> >[is it possible to talk about a machine code for the inorganic level?
> Force?]
> But that do not necessarily means that Language belongs to the intellectual
> level?
Actually, I was meaning that language is *possibly* the social code for the
intellectual level, just like DNA is the inorganic code for life. But this is
exactly what I have refreshed lately. Now I'd say that the language (or, better,
communication) is the machine code for the social level (Bo will disagree...)
While emotions are not a code at all.
In the past, we discussed emotions as a possible hormonal reaction after the
exchange of pheromonal messages... but actually, the pheromonal message is a
form of communication! Language is just a more evolved form of
communication, just like a sculpture is a more evolved form of matter.... under
the action of the upper levels. About a possible social code for the
intellectual level, a possibility could be the set of rituals... Anyway, for the
reasons I exposed in my last post on this thread, I've dropped language.
> In the same mail you state:
> >Examples of static/dynamic behavior:
> >At the inorganic level: Rest/Motion
> >At the biologic level: Replication/Mutation
> >At the social level: Tradition/Revolution
> >At the intellectual level: Method/Creativity
> Very interesting. I will probably use "At the social level:
> Tradition/Evolution", but that is maybe not very important.
Evolution or revolution? Evolution is the DQ action on all levels, so I'd not
restrain it only to the social level. Maybe I was influenced by the Andrew
Connor's paper about revolution (available on the forum). Actually, it's hard to
change a tradition without some sort of social earthquake. Anyway, these were
merely examples....
> You go on and state:
> >My suggestions for the 4 environments:
> >Space-time universe
> >Ecosystem
> >Political-Economic System
> >Public Opinion
> I maybe have to think about these, but I generally like all except Public
> Opinion. Socrates was not too happy about the public opinion, and I don't
> think it is a part of the intellectual level. In fact, I would say the
> Public Opinion belonged to the social level, and that something like
> "Scientific Opinion" could be used at the intellectual level according to my
> understanding. Please tell me if you think I'm wrong.
Oh yes, environments... another stone in the pond. This idea of the environment
came out from a consideration about a definition of level. To distinguish the
space (the "environment" where the patterns are active) from the time (the "era"
in which the level is leading the evolution). That is, we are not anymore in
the inorganic era, while the inorganic patterns are active in the space/time
universe.
So, what environments for the other levels? Now that we are in the intellectual
era, *where* can I send my intellectual patterns to fight their intellectual
battle for survival? You disagree on public opinion, but I'd say that scientific
opinion IS a public opinion, where simply the public is restrained to a
recognized elite. Even the Norwegian public opinion is an elite, where probably
a Tanzanian has almost no voice.
Another problem I have with your scientific opinion is that you seem to give
science the whole intellect. And philosophy? And theology? And arts?... I
agree that Socrates was not happy with public opinion, but when he was
discussing philosophy in the agora, well, he was having an active role just in
the Athenian public opinion. He was not happy 'cause the environment is an arena
in which patterns have to fight, and often environments are not friendly.
> Finally, what do you (Marco and Bo) mean by SOLAQI?
Well, SOLAQI is Bo copyright :-) It means Subject-Object Logic As Q-Intellect.
Bo's theory is that the Intellectual level IS the subject/object split.
According to this vision, the MOQ, surpassing the S/O Logic, represents the
arising fifth level. I've seen that in the Dan Glover's site there's a section
dedicated to SOLAQI. There's no mention to SOLAQI in the Bo's Quality Event
paper, as SOLAQI was born later. But I'm sure he will give you all the answers
you will ask for, even in Norwegian!
I've never subscribed to the theory, even if I find value in it. Some of my
objections are:
1) Pirsig says that the MOQ is an alternative map of the same territory.
2) Bo says that the MOQ can contain the SOM, while the SOM can't contain the
MOQ... But IMO the MOQ does not *contain* the SOM. They both describe each
other. The MOQ accuses the SOM of forgetting values... the SOM accuses the MOQ
of emotivism, and so on.
But, also, I'm not very far from Bo. I just think that the SOM is a form of
intellect developed mainly during the social era, so it is not really *ready*
for the fourth level era. In the end, Bo and me agree that the SOM has the
leadership of the evolution, but it doesn't know how to do.
Thanks again
Marco
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
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 - 16:01:25 BST