From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Thu Nov 28 2002 - 22:22:52 GMT
Dear Davor,
Have you found time by now (since your 12/11 15:40 +0000 posting) to re-read
the 'overdoing the dynamic' thread? If not and if it would help you, I could
forward the whole lot to you from my own archive in Outlook Express (100+
e-mails as attachments to 1 off-list e-mail; a couple of hundreds of kB's).
The issue of 'degeneracy' was covered quite thoroughly in that thread, I
think.
I can agree that 'degeneracy is just as pre-intellectual as DQ' as you
wrote, IF we understand 'degeneracy' as an antonym -in a sense- to DQ (not
in the sense in which sq and DQ are 'contradictory identical'; static versus
dynamic but both an aspect of Quality). Degeneracy is then the experience of
'not DQ' at the moment of change of patterns (at the cutting edge of
patterned experience).
I disagree however, if you EXPLAIN the (pre-intellectual?!) Quality in
'degeneracy' with something like:
'Up-level evolution is not only dependent on DQ. It is also depending on the
degeneration, like a tree has to degenerate for it's forthgoing existence
and growth.'
Instead of Quality in 'degeneracy' you are then talking about some
derivative of the (static) quality of the continuity of some pattern. That
derived quality can hardly be considered pre-intellectual any more.
With friendly greetings,
Wim
----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
Van: "Monkeys' tail or" <elkeaapheefteen@hotmail.com>
Aan: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Verzonden: dinsdag 12 november 2002 16:40
Onderwerp: Re: MD levels (Down with Types of Value, Up with Types of
Patterns)
> Beste Wim,
>
> How high/low the quality is (relative to the pattern of
> values you started with) of this new pattern of values can only be judged
> after some time, however. That judgement depends on its stability and
> versatility, which need time to be tested.
>
> Davor:
>
> I was intrigued by the <overdoing the dynamic> discussion, I loved it very
> much though I was not actively participating, I feel very sorry that I
have
> only access now to a computer that would take me two whole days to read
the
> discussion again but I will re-read it in time. For now I just try to
> explain my problem and I do not know for sure wether this subject was
> discussed in the <overdoing> tread. What I am going to say, is no some
sort
> of definite statement, just trying to get some grip here.
>
> You seem to agree that only after some time we can be sure of an idea is
of
> high Quality depending on how it latches and the stability/ versatility.
But
> I was talking of the <moment of truth>, not after a while when the
latching
> is done and the <newness> is judged. Basically I am saying that degeneracy
> is just as pre-intellectual as DQ it is also a part of the cutting edge of
> experience. Threfore we cannot say anything about it, it is just as
> undefinable as DQ. If DQ did not include degeneracy also the MOQ would not
> last, as the degeneracy part of DQ is responsible for the lower level
> destruction needed for higher level evolvement. There are two ways to go,
> the degeneracy as you suggested is responsible for a lowering of quality
> latching letterly on a lower level, or lower quality latching on the same
> level. The second way the degeneracy, as explained, creates <space> for a
> higher level to evolve.
>
> Up-level evolution is not only dependend on DQ it is also depending on the
> degeneration, like a tree has to degenerate for it's forthgoing existence
> and growth. The argument that this is actually part of the progress and
> therefore DQ I find hard to swallow, for trees do die out, societies are
> destroyed and ideas are falisfied. It is all too easy to state that it is
> all just DQ because then imo DQ would need some kind of <imperative for
the
> good> and for sure the world would look a lot better, more intellectual I
> would say.
>
> Something in this discussion makes feel uncomfortable, it could be that I
am
> mistaken a paper wall for a massive granite one. This is one of those post
> that can only end in one way;
>
> I could be wrong,
>
> Davor
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
>
> 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
>
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 : Thu Nov 28 2002 - 22:23:22 GMT