XCTO RESPONDS TO JC'S ASSERTION THAT TRUTH IS THE HIGHEST EXPRESSION OF THE
INTELLECT LEVEL, AND JON'S (CNTRYFORCE) IMPORTANT QUESTION
In a message dated 12/1/99 2:51:40 PM Pacific Standard Time,
jc@ridgetelnet.com writes:
> If something is found to be untrue
> today, then it was always untrue. Despite the belief system of any
> particular paradigm. "Many truths" is just an awkward term for "belief".
> IMHO.
>
This maybe a true statement, but later on I think you might see that this
statement might also be stuck in a particular paradigm, the SOM one.
You start with:
> Extrapolation of patterns throughout intellectual evolution plainly speak
> to the point that what we believe now, will be discovered untrue in later
> developments of intellect. Thus the necessity for being precise in using
> "belief" for that which we hold as "true" and TRUTH as that yardstick by
> which we measure our evolving "beliefs".
And then you say:
> A knower's concept of Truth is relative to the defined cosmology of the
> knower.
>
> In the SOM world, intellectual understanding of the universe grew through
> the dynamic interaction of the "facts" of the cosmos conflicting with the
> static models that were held to be true. When these "truths" were exposed
> as "wrong beliefs" by the searcher, a very high quality feeling ensued. In
> fact, I'd say it was in pursuit of this high quality feeling that caused
> the searcher to dig for the truth in the first place. When he discoverd
> the "actual truth" of the matter, he was experiencing the evolutionary
> thrill that comes with advancement, with leaving the old paradigm behind
> and entering a new understanding of the cosmos. This feeling of being born
> again, is what the MoQ understands as the experience of DQ. Accordingly,
> the MoQ asserts that what was really being sought was DQ. The
> scientist/searcher says he he was seeking Truth.
I absolutely agree with the above statements, but want to stress how your
'yardstick' of measure, the TRUTH, is an evolving system of 'beliefs.' It's
one of those, it's not the destination (TRUTH), but the journey thing. TRUTH
cannot be found, but it can be sought after.
The two systems harmonize
> when you understand the concept of Truth to be the highest level of static
> intellectual value. The first expression of Dynamic Quality as it descends
> into the intellectual sphere. The ongoing intellectual evolutionary pull
> which drives cosmologists to keep seeking higher quality metaphysical
> models. That which is True.
>
> Ultimately, Truth is the highest standard for any static intellectual
> pattern, while remaining subordinate to Quality. For Truth itself is only
> a valid concept because of the HQ that confirms and generates any
> perception of it (Truth). Truth is definable. Ultimate Quality is not.
> I guess my question is answered. Truth does not = Quality.
>
> Any quibbles with the assertion that Truth is the highest expression of
> static intellectual quality and the operation of Dynamic Quality upon
> intellectual patterns of value?
>
I agree with your assertion insofar as it exists within the Intellectual
Level. In fact, it's the best representation of the aim of the Intellectual
Level I have read in a while. But it doesn't make the problems of humanity
go away. What I want to point out, is the relation of Truth to Quality if
'Truth does not = Quality.'
SOM thinking and your conclusion of Truth being the highest expression of
IntPOV (Intellectual Pattern of Value) both agree. But it is your noting of
Truth being subordinate to Quality that is more important.
Your basic idea is very similar to Bodvar's SOLAQI (Subject/object logic as
Quality's Intellectual Level) theory, and thus, I have the same reservations
(which I note Bo senses the problem as well). But if the MOQ contains our
entire reality ("everything exists in those four levels, nothing is left out"
- from LILA) Than Quality is not really represented within the MOQ although
it is purported as existing throughout.
Having said Truth is the highest expression of IntPOV kind of says there is
nothing higher that exists in all of reality. But there is something
higher...
THE TEST OF WHAT IS TRUE IS THE GOOD.
And we have this test through direct experience, pragmatism, etc.
But our test really is at a higher expression (at the meta- level I guess you
would say) than Truth.
In saying that, either Truth is not the highest thing in IntPOV or there is a
fifth level. In the archives this was discussed extensively as "MF Fifth
Level?"
My personal feeling (ha!) is that the answer to the either/or doesn't matter.
A Fifth Level of Quality may eventually rise above the Intellect level, but
it will only give us a system of testing the Truth. Until that happens, we
will do our own test of the Truth by experience, lesson by lesson, question
by question. But there definately is a conflict in the MOQ over this.
So where does this TEST OF TRUTH exist? That is what I leave to discussion.
I'll read it in your MD TEST OF TRUTH posts. But my conclusive statements
follow.
JON SAYS:
>Subj: MD Important Question
>Date: 12/1/99 11:13:43 PM Pacific Standard Time
>From: Cntryforce@aol.com
>What is Truth?
>My question is: is truth the greatest good, or is good the greatest truth?
>Can that question even be answered? And can the answer to that question be
>proven true? Or for that matter, can the answer to that question be proven
>good?
>Can something be good if it isn't true? Certainly something can be true if
it
>isn't good. Truth is supposed to be truth, no matter if you like it or not.
>It just *is*. But good depends *solely* on whether you like it or not.
Right?
>Truth is oblivious to opinions; you can't make it go away because you don't
>like it.
>Good, on the other hand, depends on opinions in order to exist. "Man is the
>measure of all things." Am I way off track here? If so, explain.
>Jon
Well Jon, this is absolutely related to my above discussion. I think my best
response would be to look back at ZAMM and the problem Phaedrus had with
Socrates' pilosophy theory that Truth is the highest form of the Good. I
already stated this in an earlier post (Truth=Quality), but it answers your
question.
The idea of "Man is the Measure" is a Sophist one inscribed on one of the
Greek Temples. Socrates defeated that idea with his Dialectic (which I
consider the true beginning of the IntellectPOV, but that was a discussion of
almost two years ago - Platt, Roger, remember we tried to find the initial
starting points of all the levels).
I think that one of the points of ZAMM was that Truth is a false God and the
search for the Good is not COMPLETE in Truth. While the 'objective
knowledge' that science has created may be created as Principles these
principles are not actually objective; The many "Truths" that we hold are
actually 'beliefs.'
My conclusive statement is that the Test of the Truth is the Good is the
relationship of Truth to Quality and further discussion of this relationship
is needed.
xcto
P.S. Jon, I think that your question one of those Nurture/Nature questions,
when the answer appears to be mu, it is both. Truth is that evolving pattern
of objective ideal. A changing Ideal, what is that? Damn those questions.
I think our pondering have shown us that the Truth we have been seeing isn't
a Truth that can be found, just sought after. Chickens and Eggs.
Infinity(DNE(Does Not Exist) mathematical answers) and Reality. The
Uncertaincy Principle. Quality.
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:15 BST