From: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com
Date: Tue Oct 15 2002 - 00:23:50 BST
Squonk: Hi Wim,
We have not had too much in the way of a discussion before today?
Maybe i have nothing of value to say for you?
Dear ? (naming her/himself Squonk),
I read your 13/10 19:11 -0400 suggestion to associate 'memes' with the
social level and 'hypermemes' with the intellectual level before and
dismissed it (for myself) as still suggesting too much similiarity between
two discrete levels and types of static patterns of values. They would still
have 'memes' as common denominator.
Sq: The term Hypermeme came right off the top of my head, and i expect a far
better term may be employed should we wish to seriously take the mediation of
memes according to methodologies; methodologies which are, by there mode of
being, divorced from culture, seriously? I feel mathematics is one such
methodology, although it can of course reinforce cultural value through its
application to physical science?
Maths is also Dynamic, artistic and aesthetic for those who get off on it?
I know much more about Horse than about you. I even read an explanation of
his name on this list that suggested that he also uses it off-list. I do
care who the persons are that I e-correspond with on this list, because it
enables me to discriminate between their contributions to the MoQ (as an
intellectual static pattern of values) and the other intellectual (and
social) patterns of values they are expressing.
Sq: The Monster in Frankenstien read John Milton without having any idea who
JM was and yet he fell under its civilising influence?
I feel sure you really do not have to know anything about me?
Thanks for caring, but i may be killed in a road traffic accident tomorrow
and this will be of no consequence?
Naming things including people is a requisite for social patterns of values.
Without social patterns of values no intellectual pattern of values can
exist, not even a MoQ.
Sq: I feel social patterns are in very much point of fact getting in the way
of this forum? I began a thread recently called, Celebrity status. Soon
afterwards, more threads appeared dealing with the same subject, but no link
to me was made? There is too much jostling for celebrity status here, and i
have the impression you avoid it to a greater extent than most.
You seem to be using 'celebrity', which has a negative connotation in a
culture which highly values equivalence of people, to react against all
social patterns of values.
Sq: The equivalence of people is an intellectually imposed pattern of value;
a method for fooling people into feeling equal when celebrity status
subjugates them. That's my warped view of the world for you!
A less pejorative way to describe social quality
is simply 'status' or the difference in practical value of different things
and people. If we are not able to distinguish things (and yes, people) by
their different practical value, any social pattern of values and any
society/community will break down and so will the community of subscribers
to this list.
Sq: I don't know? I have a low quality feeling about this? Something doesn't
feel right somehow? I understand that may sound like a fudge? But i have
learned to trust my immediate perceptions.
You may feel very passionate about preserving the MoQ, with some of your
contributions (like your most recent 'conversation') you are rather
undermining it in my experience.
With friendly greetings,
Wim
Sq: I hear what you say about your feeling i may be an undermining influence?
That's kind of strange to me, because i feel, if you will pardon me for
saying so, that Mr. Beasley has, and is doing far more to undermine
understanding than anything i can or ever will do?
Name one thing that has 'wowed' you having come from Mr. Beasley himself and
not as a reference to someone else's work?
My little story about students being distracted by SOLAQI and Wilber has in
no way impinged upon your responses to me before now? I should very much like
to hear what you have to say upon that and many other matters Wim?
Sadly, as i am about to leave the forum, i cannot respond to you! ;)
I feel this forum is lacking a dynamic, and my repulsive tone has been a
deliberate disruptive move in order to shake things up a little?
Do you seriously think i wish to be associated with some of the things i have
said and done here?
Take care Wim, and look after yourself?
Squonk.
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 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 10:37:58 GMT