Dear Bo,
You wrote 5/3 9:48 +0100:
'my "crusade" to get Q-intellect reigned in under the general value of S/O
(the ability to divide what is objective from what is subjective is
REASON)'.
If you thus amend your SOLAQI-idea
from 'Quality Intellect = Subject Object Divide' (as I understood it until
now)
via 'Quality Intellect = the ability to divide what is objective from what
is subjective'
into 'the Moral Basic Principle [as Marco introduced the expression 10/2
14:11 +0100] of Quality Intellect = the value of dividing objective from
subjective'
it becomes much more acceptable for me.
'The value of dividing objective from subjective' can be integrates with the
moral principle Rog suggested 23/2 13:32 -0500 as foundation of the 4th
level (the value of 'understanding') and my slightly adapted version of 3/3
0:00 +0100 (the value of 'reflecting before acting').
If -as I suggested- the moral principle that founds the social level is the
value of proven practices, the intellectual level makes the exception that
you CAN do better (than traditional practices allow you do) IF you
understand what you are doing and why, in other words if you reflect before
you act. Dividing objective from subjective is (until now) the dominant way
of understanding (reflecting on) why some practices are more succesful than
others.
Dividing Dynamic from static is indeed a rebellious way of understanding and
reflection.
If you take the whole list of moral principles, every next principle makes
an exception to the earlier one:
1. the value of lasting
2. the value of adapting
3. the value of proven practices
4. the value of reflecting before acting
Biological value says: 'it is best to last (to have physical stability),
UNLESS you can adapt (genetically) to new circumstances'.
Social value says: 'it is best to adapt genetically, UNLESS proven practices
(material culture) enable you to adapt better'.
Intellectual value says: 'it is best to apply proven practices, UNLESS you
can think of something that will work better, because you understand how
things work'.
What exception will the next level make to the value of
understanding/reflecting? In my opinion the MoQ does not make such an
exception yet. It is just another way of understanding/reflecting. Do you
agree by now that your SOLAQI-idea does not imply that the MoQ means the
founding of a new level?
With friendly greetings,
Wim
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 - 16:01:56 BST