From: Steve Peterson (speterson@fast.net)
Date: Sun Nov 10 2002 - 20:01:36 GMT
Davor, Wim, Platt, David, all,
Davor states:
> The way to divide the static patterns is not a mere subjective and relative
> activity. In general there are two perspectives the MOQ-perspective and the
> SOM-perspective. You seem to take the SOM-perspective. Why? Well you want to
> describe a a play, or democracy etc. as composed from only one level that
> is not possible, subjects as well as objects are composed of more levels. Do
> you accept this? yes you do.
>
> A tree however is is a spov built up from inorganic pattern of value and
> biological pattens of value. If there is a ancient ritual of naked man
> running backwards around the tree to beg nature for more fit women the three
> still is an spov built up from inorganic and biological patterns value. The
> ritual is built up from inorganic, biological and social patterns of value.
>
> Further, if one states something to be an intellectual spov than that
> implies indirectly that is is also composed of the lower levels that made it
> possible.
Steve:
This makes sense to me. Platt said the same thing with, "Democracy is
better because as a higher level it includes sex, whereas sex is confined to
the biological level." I will also keep thinking about Wim's idea of
considering how a pattern is latched.
Davor:
> Your post goes on on relativity and over and over again you start out with
> the premiss I dismiss, you start out with the subject and the are speaking
> of the relativity of the patterns in relation to this subject if I
> understood it well. this imo is a great distortion of the MOQ and by know
> after all the above arguments I hope you see what I am aiming at.
Steve:
You can't see me, but I'm hanging my head in shame.
>
> Steve says:
>
> Dynamic good is fredom of static patterns
>
> Davor:
>
> So is degeneracy!
Steve:
Here I disagree. Degeneracy is freedom from social patterns, but not
biological patterns. I think that awareness of each of the four levels is
how we become free of their static patterns and act out of dynamic morality.
(Note that I said "awareness of" rather than "awareness on" in deference to
your previous post on awareness. Or do you think an awareness/consciousness
distinction makes some sense?)
>
> Steve:
>
> Static patterns are relative
>
> Davor:
>
> In the way that they are not fixed by nature, not in the way they are
> perceived by man.
Steve:
I don't understand what you mean. Can you expound?
Davor:
>
> Your last question;
>
> I ask again what type of pattern is a person?
>
> All of the four levels, it works perfectly but if you take this person and
> paste it all over the world you get a distorted version. Because the MOQ is
> not depending on a subject to perceive the world, the world does not need to
> consist of solely relative spov.
>
> I rest my case,
Steve:
What can I say? Thanks to all who have contributed to this discussion. I
still don't know that I can apply the moq to answer moral conflicts, but I
have a better idea of what people mean when they talk about the levels.
Steve
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 : Sun Nov 10 2002 - 19:52:30 GMT