Wavedave and Squonk
Re. Sq.'s response in the "confession" thread. For a moment I believed it
was for me, but soon realized that he was speaking to Matt.
Returning to the "consciousness" issue.
> Eureka!
you said after I had said:
> > This may give me an handle. You regard "grey cells" (i.e. thinking)
> > as internal, but when an animal (Biology) applies its grey cells
> > that's internal too, and if so it don't follow the
> > inorg.bio/soci.intell. lines ...which is Gary's idea.
> > Also as Pirsig says: the probability/preference (determinism/free
> > will) runs right down to the inorganic level.
and continued:
> Right,The "thinking" that "grey cells" do, is an internal pattern of
> values and this "thinking" "runs right down to the inorganic level".
Pirsig's way of tucking SOM in under the MoQ is the said system of
inorg+org=objects ..etc. but the freedom/determinism issue is something
different, something to do with the dynamic/static balance at each level, an
issue I am a bit uncomfortable with because it so easily evokes SOM's
internal/external.
> "Thinking" is a bit strong let's just say that internal values help
> determine, to some degree in all patterns, the preferences or
> probabilities confirmable empirically while the internal values must
> be confirmed by other methods.
Maybe I gave the devil the little finger by entering this path, but your
sentence: "while the internal values must be confirmed by other methods"
sounds so like the argument for mind's "otherworldliness", and the DQ/SQ
divide is not equal to the S/O one. The patterns are value patterns no more
no less and their static aspect is the reason they are AT ALL.
> Pirsig's computer
> hardware/software/voltages/flipflops/novel analogy (though technically
> not accurate) indicates this when he says you will never find the
> novel in the one's and zero's. But that does not mean that the "novel"
> does not exist there. Just because I can't tell what your thoughts are
> by looking at your brainwaves does not mean you don't have any.
Here we are at the biological level, but biology is also organisms without one
single nerve knot, what is its "internal/external". You said above that thinking
is a bit strong, but we are seduced into the mind/body blind ally by this logic.
The dynamic aspect is present (according to Pirsig) at the inorganic level
and there you can't find any internal/external divide ....only that matter is
moral too.
The "moral" of all this is that the dynamic/static issue must not be mixed with
the "SOM as part of the MOQ" problem. Like Caesar's fixed end-of-
speeches phrase in the Roman parliament about Cartage, mine is that the
SOL interpretation solves this problem the best.
Bo
PS You did not answer how you see "one/many" at the inorganic level.
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 : Fri Oct 25 2002 - 16:06:17 BST