Hi Davor:
You asked:
> Currently I am writing an essay on time and its relation to the MOQ(Which
> will include the views expressed in the MF discussion on time and other
> posts from MD), would you care to expand a little how all logic based on
> time-dependent cause & effect eventually runs into paradox or disappears
> into infinite regress and how Quality is immune for this? I think I
> understand what you are trying to say and you will use the arguments
> against causation but give it a go please.
Ultimately logic fails when you go back to origins. Like, "How can time
be created when it takes time to create?" Or, "Why is there something
rather than nothing?" I know of only three rational explanations, each
based on an unprovable premise: 1)God, 2) accident or 3) ethical
requirement. God is the religious premise, accident the scientific
premise and ethical requirement the MOQ or Quality premise.
The argument for God as first cause is well covered in literature. The
accident premise fails by self-contradiction: events fall into causation
patterns for no cause whatsoever. The ethical requirement premise has
at least something going for it. It's good to be here. A good universe
make that possible. (In MOQ terms, the universe prefers precondition
Quality.)
At this point, all rationalizations end and infinite regress takes over.
Who made God? What set accidents in motion? Where did an ethical
requirement come from? All logical truth eventually winds up here, at
infinity. (Children can drive adults nuts with why and how questions.)
As for paradox, Kurt Godel's "Incompleteness Theorem" proved that
every system of logic must have at least one premise that cannot be
proven or verified without contradicting itself.
So how does one establish truth? The limits of logic are transcended
when one's own innate sense of Quality determines for whatever reason
(explanatory power, simplicity, elegance, coherence, correspondence,
consensus) "That's a good truth." And infinite regress questions stop
with "Because it's good."
In case this subject interests you, (note that I changed the Subject to
Limits of Logic) here are some thought provoking ideas:
Some widely held beliefs that are self-contradictory
It's good to be nonjudgmental
No one can be certain of anything.
Nothing is black or white.
Reality is a continuum.
There are no facts
There are no absolutes
Truth is culturally determined.
Enigmas of the scientific worldview
Physics is an attempt to grasp reality conceptually as it is thought to
exist independently of conceptions.
Science can't explain why it is good.
Scientists with minds assert the universe is mindless.
The belief that all is material is not itself material.
The premise of science that only propositions that can be empirically
verified are true cannot be empirically verified.
The principle of objective facts is not an objective fact.
The theory of evolution assumes man is controlled by the cause/effects
laws of the universe while the sub-atomic particles of his body are not.
To embrace the view that all is determined one must decide in a free act
of choice that there is no freedom of choice.
To say science is unconcerned with values is to say science is
unconcerned with truth.
Mind-benders, conundrums, and teasers
Events believed to be real are really not real but we believe them to be
real because we believe everyone else believes they are real.
If sensations are something I have, I have a self. But who is the I that
has a self. Another self. And who has the sensation of another self. A
third self. How many selves must I postulate?
Intellect requires the limits of space and time to function, yet intellect
has shown space and time to be illusions.
Reality that created the mind is by the mind created.
The more we try to behave without greed the more we realize we're
doing it for greedy reasons.
The present never changes, but everything that changes changes in the
present.
The task of society is to force things to happen which are acceptable
only when they happen without being forced.
To be you is to be separate from everything else, but you are nothing
apart from everything else.
We try to maintain a distinction between ideology and reality, but any
definition of reality is an ideology.
What we have in common is the belief we are apart.
You'll never know what it's like to be kissed by you.
Hope this helps.
Platt
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 - 16:02:16 BST