Bo,
I'm not sure if you're interested but I see an analogy
between SOLAQI-MOQ and Wittgenstein. Your SOLAQI is
essentially early Wittgenstein, and your view of MOQ
is essentially late Wittgenstein. Sam and I think late
Wittgenstein subsumes early Wittgenstein, as is a
necessary step to understand all of Wittgenstein. MOQ
subsumes SOLAQI but is a necessary step to understand
MOQ.
> SOM is a
> metaphysics and covers all experience, BUT
> AFTERWARDS THIS S/O
> ARGUMENT HAS NO RELEVANCE FOR THE MOQ because its
> starting point is something that is prior to both
> subjective and objective!
Are you a mystic on the MOQ? Do you agree that there
are ways to communicate without SOLAQI? Late
Wittgenstein knew you could communicate without
language, which reversed his earlier position. I think
you can communicate without SOLAQI. We can communicate
within the direct experience of Dynamic Quality. So
Phaedrus communicated BIOLOGICALLY with Lila at the
beginning of the book. Our private experience of
Quality however can't be communicated, which
corresponds to Wittgenstein's private language
argument. I think the distinction between DQ and
Quality is very subtle, very sublime, and very
important. Many people equate DQ with Quality, but
that is wrong. DQ can be shared, and communicated BUT
it's a form of life which comes BEFORE SOLAQI, and as
such we can't reason about it. I should call it the
"Angus Test" akin to the "Turing Test." If you can
reason about it, it is not DQ. If you can "witness"
about it, then it is possibly DQ. Thus, I have had a
recent emphasis on story as the SOLAQI form of DQ
communication. But SOLAQI is only ONE FORM of DQ
communication as there are other forms of life that
communicate DQ, such as biology and social and even
inorganic communication. An inorganic communication
would be a form of existentialism, a form of cogito
ergo sum. That I extend in space is a communication
and is in some sense a basis of the MOQ since the
inorganic is the base block of the 4 forms of
communication. It does bring up the issue of whether
you can share DQ with reason. And to reiterate the
only way that I found was a story, because it allows
me to access my private experience, my DQ.
Anyway for early Witt, check Tractatus Logicus
Philosophicus and for late Witt. check Philosophical
Investigations.
Angus
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
http://games.yahoo.com/
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 - 16:02:12 BST