Hi Erin, Bo, All:
> I thought intentionality was interesting because I think awareness seems to
> continue to develop throughout the levels. Basically I think awareness
> develops as our expectations become better. But I think there is a big leap
> going from awareness with intentionality and awareness without
> intentionality.
I don't know about intentionality, but that "awareness seems to continue
to develop throughout the levels" is also my belief and probably the bone
of contention with Bo who would like to see us abandon the term
"awareness" completely when discussing the MOQ. I don't see how
MOQ evolution could take place unless particles, atoms, molecules,
and organisms were able to react to values on their own level, indicating
some form of awareness, rudimentary though it may be. Wilber calls the
lowest level of awareness "prehension," growing over time and evolving
upward through sensation, perception, impulse, emotion, symbols,
concepts, conop, formop and finally vision logic. I don't always agree
with Wilber since he gives short shrift to values (compared to Pirsig),
but in this case I think he's on target. Even a virus knows when "it's
better here," requiring some form of awareness (prehension) of its
surrounding value patterns.
Platt
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 - 16:02:20 BST