Hi Horse and Squad
You wrote:
>
> Umm... In which case Intellect is prior to the levels on which it is dependent.
Not quite, since the intellect which is prior to the levels is not a part of the
levels' universe.
> That's stretching things a bit too far. If we follow this path we end up in the nuage
> domain and the MoQ becomes no better than astrology or palm-reading.
Nuage huh? That's a first, I usually consider my view of the MoQ extremely
strict and classical. Aren't you the fuzziness advocate on the LS?
> Why this insistence on the sanctity of 4 levels.
Because they are enough! They represent the most general way to describe
describable things. You mentioned simplicity and that's exactly what they are.
> It sounds to me like Intellect
> defending it's territory. The MoQ is not (IMO) a stagnant metaphysics. It may be
> part of the intellectual level, but that level is only static from a certain point of view
> - it is not stagnant.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to make it as complete and general as we can.
A metaphysics can be totally inductive, only describing things that exists and
has happened, not generalizing or trying to predict anything. But I couldn't
care less about such a description of reality.
> The knowledge that we currently possess is insufficient to say
> with any certainty that the future development of the universe will be explained by
> ANY current metaphysics, let alone the MoQ.
> By definition, the universe will always be the universe - this doesn't mean it is the
> only universe or the only possible universe.
> The MoQ currently sees reality as contained by 4 levels of PoV's. To say that this
> will always be so is dogmatism - something I don't accept.
I'm not actually saying that, I'm just saying that I don't think computer viruses
are patterns of a higher level and I'm using "The physical order of the universe is
also the moral order of the universe" as the main argument.
> As far as I'm aware, what we term the inorganic level is the level which consist of
> non-living stuff.
I don't, mainly because I think the term "alive" as it is mostly used is
ambiguous. It usually results in the same set of patterns though.
> Particles, molecules, rocks, water, planets galaxies etc. Inorganic
> patterns of value. A floppy disk is built from inorganic material.
So is everything.
> Now all of a
> sudden we have parallel inorganic levels, parallel organic levels etc.
Hence the meta prefix in metaphysics. One metaphysics, several physics.
One class, several objects. One grammar, several languages. I'm
discussing the metaphysics, not the physics.
> This is
> starting to sound like the Ptolemaic explanations for why Mars goes backwards in
> its path around the earth. The MoQ is supposed to make reality simpler to
> understand.
An inductive metaphysics is very simple to understand, that doesn't make
it valuable. First try to understand the multi-dimensional view of the
levels, then criticize it.
> I'm on dodgy ground here, but if SO thinking is Q-Intellect then how can Q-
> Intellect fail to be aware of itself and the lower levels. Perhaps Bo could help here.
I accept the SOTAQI idea so far as to acknowledge that SO thinking values
the same things as intellectual patterns. That doesn't mean that SO thinking
is aware of that fact, it thinks it is objective.
Magnus
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:33 BST