Bo and Ross,
BO:
We don't speak much any more, Roger,
ROG:
Yes, I miss talking to you. Rest assured I stll keep an eye out for your
work -- which is always done with both insight and care. We just seem to be
fishing in different ponds for the last few years.
BO:
Pirsig took the full leap and said: THERE IS NO ABSTRACT-
CONCRETE DIVIDE however many retro-abstractions are made.
ROG:
Indeed. This is essential to the MOQ. And even without the dynamic/static
split, Zeiliger's ideas can make sense to those that do recognize the split.
BO:
Now, Zeilinger really HAS postulated that the physical world is
information and maybe it will be the last straws that breaks the
SOM's back.
ROG:
But we don't want to destroy it, we want to build the new map from its higher
vistas.
ROG prev:
>The
>value in a pattern then becomes a measure of the information contained
>within or protected by the pattern. And DQ becomes pursuit of new
>information (at the never-ending risk of just finding noise).
BO:
Er.. it's information as the basic physical reality which is Zeilinger's
message, not information ABOUT any reality beneath information.
As is Pirsig's about Quality as the groundstuff, not any value
sticking to this or that phenomenon or thing. This may be just what
you are saying though ...?
ROG:
Thanks for catching this. I think I was actually juxtaposing two definitions
of information. One corresponds with Zeiliger and the other corresponds with
what is subjectively known as bit-reduction, or the ability to condense
interactions down to patterns. It is the creation of the patterns themselves
-- not subjective awareness of this property in the pattern -- which seems to
correlate with SQ. I don't know, perhaps there is some type of conservation
of information where random bits are converted into higher quality patterns
of different but equal information. (I am way over my head on this one
though... just consider me rambling. I have read there are two opposing
uses of the term information though. Ross?)
BO:
"Metaphor"? Wasn't that a thread once, with the result that
EVERYTHING IS METAPHORIC and that a "Metaphysics of
Metaphors" could have been made?
ROG:
I agree. All metaphors, all the way down.
BO:
I am not too happy
about the "map" comparison. Each static level may be seen as a
map - the last one (intellect-as-SOM the toughest to escape from,
but the MoQ itself can't well be regarded a map because that
suggests a reality beyond which it is a map of. Exactly as the
Information idea says there is no beyond information!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ROG:
But maps can be self referential, just as reality is self referential.
Good chatting with you,
Rog
PS -- Ross, you sound like the subject matter expert, so lead the way....
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 - 16:01:42 BST