Hallo Gerhard and Distresses.
Thanks for paying attention to Nörretranders' book and to my own
"expression" list. Your renderings of the former was excellent and
need no comments, about the latter I have a few remarks. Let me
go that one over from point to point.
snip.................
> In order to get any further with this problem, I need to come up with
> a system / definition of how I am at the different levels. Here is my
> opinion in this regard with some comments on how the ideas from
> Norretranders book can be implemented: - On an inorganic level I am
> atoms, tissue, cells and whatever there is left in a corpse. According
> to Bo Skutvik, this level expresses itself by interaction.
I agree most profoundly about ...."In order to get any further...etc."
A system must comply with some (mathematical) beauty to satisfy
your demands. At first the MoQ did so - doing away with the SOM
impossibilities - and I was delighted, but as the discussion
developed there was questions where this and that belonged, and it
soon looked like a mess. That's why my list which again made it
terse and beautiful ...to me at least.
In its time I had the ... Sensation - Emotion - Reason figured out,
but lacked the inorganic "expression". I asked the group for
suggestions and "Interaction" was proffered by Magnus Berg. It
rhymes at least ......??.
> - On a
> biological level I have life in this body, I can transform dead
> material (meat, vegetables, water and air) by a dynamic process into
> life. The biological level controls the main processes that are needed
> to keep me alive as breathing, digestion etc. These processes are
> controlled by an autogenous neural system, not controlled by the
> conscious me (conscious used in a medical term). According to Bo
> Skutvik, this level expresses itself by sensations (adrenaline
> controlled emotions).
I notice that you say: " . a definition of HOW I AM at the different
levels. As I see it identity isn't an issue at the biological level, you -
Gerhard - involves an organism of the mammal class whose
biological workings are stupendous complex, yet, if MoQ is valid
something common must characterize each level: What goes for
an amoeba must go for a human being.
Like an alchemist I got the essence to be SENSATION. The
bacterium, amoeba or earthworm have no special sense organs,
but nevertheless sense what is good and bad for their lives. The
homo sapiens is the very same value evolved a million times over,
but the basic value is more clear at the lower end. We must not
mix in what we as social beings deem good or what we as
intellectual beings know is good, but keep biological value clean.
You went on:
> I guess anger and fear is among these
> sensations.
No, those are emotions! The proverbial amoeba encountering a
drop of sulphur acid (ZAMM page 143? where I'm now I don't have it
with me) will sense "bad" but no chill runs up its spine. An
earthworm being drawn up by a bird senses "harm", but fear isn't
part of its repertoire, and biologically we are that simple too. Keep
the social and intellectual at bay at this stage.
> I have no problem in adding that the biological level is
> also controlling other unconscious actions, like athletics, games,
> intense conversation, erotic activities etc. In my opinion my
> attractiveness on this level is judged purely on reproduction
> qualities, sexual attractiveness. - On a social level I have a
> language so that I can communicate with other persons. I have a set of
> norms and rules for what is right and wrong on this level, but I act
> according to these rules more or less unconsciousness (although I must
> be conscious in a medical term). According to Bo Skutvik, this level
> expresses itself by feelings.
OK, but I prefer the term "emotion". "Feeling" is too ambiguous (as
a compatriot you know that our "fölelse" has the same ambiguity)
Sex as biology/proliferation is modified by countless social
overtones, but I don't want to complicate things by starting an
analysis of these interactions.
> I have included guilt (not doing what is
> right), a feeling of inferiority, hurt feelings and faint-heartedness
> into this category. All these feelings may initiate sensations on a
> biological level as a defence mechanism.
Yes, this is just right, emotions have an enormous range and
strength, its the (third) most powerful/valuable level, second only to
REASON. It can kill and it can bless.
> In my opinion my
> attractiveness on this level is judged by my degree of rich and famous
> (this social attractiveness is probably different in different
> cultures). The social patterns I have been accepting, is guiding what
> I regard as sexual attractiveness.
Yes, bio-patterns are heavily "modified" by Society ...also by
Intellect orginating on the intellectual level.
> Why do I do things that are not
> according to the rules, an end up with guilt feelings?
Right, "bad conscience" shows how Society can control a member
- but REASON can override society.
> If my
> unconscious "Me" is running the show, I end up doing things that might
> be outside what my social "Me" is accepting (making a fool of myself
> at a party).
Worse than "making a fool", take an act like rape which is the
normal thing at the biological level. It is strongly condemned by
society .....and give rise to guilt (bad conscience).
> I can also intellectual decide to do something else than
> the society expect. According to MoQ I'm controlling my biological
> "Me" from this level.
Nörretranders I/me is somewhat SOM-generated, but it works here,
only that the MoQ would say that Intellect controls Society (not
Biology, if I get you right when saying "something else than the
society expect)
But - as always - the lower level is the platform of the upper and if
things go awry at the top, it kicks in. For instance: Normally
Intellect is our point of view, and murder is wrong, but if war strikes
the social values takes over and our view shifts to the next safe
latch. Suddenly killing is the right thing to do. Only the MoQ
explains this mysterious moral shift, while SOM is helpless here
with it's simple one-dimensional evil/good notion.
> I'm still a little uncertain on how these
> processes are performed (my SOM mind is disturbing my mind, I guess),
> but methods as mental training by visualisation give an explanation
> here. - On an intellectual level I have ideas and can think and reason
> (okay, please no joking on this :-).
Er...."can think"!? (Reason is correct though!) is the eternal "thorn
in my flesh" . IMO the Q-Intellect is not the "mental" realm of SOM
where thinking - as such - takes place. A social-focussed person
do mental exercises, writes and reads, no, Intellect is rather the
ability to discriminate what is objective from what is subjective
(SOLAQI=subject/object logic as Q-intellect). Back to my war
example (there is no better demonstration of the social value
versus intellectual) produces propaganda, its simple-minded
populace accepts it while the intellectuals see thorough it. But
remember no level is out-of-the-blue. that's also a tenet of the MoQ.
If the bells toll the staunchest intellectual will eventually slip back
to social jingoism.
> I can make mental models of how
> things are working. Without the intellectual level I guess I would not
> be able to make a model about the world as the centre of the universe
> and the moon and sun rotating around us. I would definitely not be
> able to interpret a more abstract model of the sun as the centre of
> out solar system. I guess I would only treat it as something like a
> social pattern.
EXACTLY (I have no more adjectives)
> I can use the information I have available and achieve
> a higher level of understanding. In my opinion my attractiveness on
> this level is judged by my degree of cultural intellect, eloquence,
> being interesting in discussions, cleverness and to some extent
> insight. Creative thinking is performed at this level. According to Bo
> Skutvik, this level expresses itself by reason. I'm not totally
> certain about this, so I will not comment any more on this subject.
This last section was good Gerhard.
> Finally, a comment on Free will:
This is such a wide topic that it deserves a post of its own.
Bo
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