From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Thu Dec 19 2002 - 21:54:35 GMT
Dear Davor,
You wrote 14 Dec 2002 18:15:27 +0000:
'you just see it (degeneracy) as lower quality latching (lower level or less
balance), I have my reservations whether degeneracy is exactly that'
For me 'degeneracy' is just a word, a symbol, with certain connotations (for
me) deriving from it being part of (several) intellectual patterns of values
(which I participate in). I make this symbol stand for a specific pattern of
experience which I describe in MoQ terms as the dissolving of a pattern of
value and relatching of Quality experience in a somehow 'lower quality' way.
For me, given the intellectual patterns of value I participate in, the term
'degeneracy' fits this pattern of experience. It not necessarily does so for
you.
When you write 'I have my reservations whether degeneracy is exactly that',
I translate that you are having another pattern of experience in mind which
you would like to describe with the word 'degeneracy'. That's alright. I
have no monopoly on the word. Just make clear (preferably in MoQ terms in
this discussion list) what pattern of experience you do have in mind.
You may have been trying to do so when you wrote:
'some intellectual ideas need the social and sometimes even biological level
for being latched at all.
... the question is to latch or not to latch, it is more moral for an idea
to be latched on a low level instead of not being latched at all. What I am
saying is that intellectual ideas, the most moral ideas possible on an MOQ
scale, also need some kind of latching on a lower level.'
This sounds like nonsense in my eyes however, given the way I use these MoQ
terms:
An intellectual pattern of value is latched on the intellectual level, a
social one on the social level and a biological one on the biological level.
If we understand an idea as an intellectual pattern of value, it is by
definition ONLY latched on the intellectual level, (in my definition of the
intellectual level:) by means of people copying ways of motivating their
conscious activity from each other. A way of motivating conscious activity
among several people 'forms' a specific pattern of meanings connected to
specific combinations of words. Meanings of combined words form ideas.
I cannot imagine what you mean when you say that (such) an idea not only can
but even needs to be latched on the social level (by means of people
unconsciously copying behavior from each other, thus passing on habits and
material culture -not ideas-) or -even more unimaginable- on the biological
level (by means of DNA strings copying themselves).
You try to describe a pattern of experience involving 'balancing' and
'harmonizing' involving more MoQ levels. You don't seem able to clarify to
me -in MoQ terms (applying clear definitions of levels and types of
latching)- that pattern of experience.
Part of the problem is of course that I have already appropriated in earlier
postings the terms 'balancing' and 'harmonizing'. I have been writing about
the balance between static and dynamic aspects (stability and versatility)
of patters of value and about a 'lure' for static patterns of value to
'harmonize' (the way of finding that 'balance') with patterns of value of a
next higher level (which are -at the lower level- experienced as DQ). I can
only (temporarily) let go of those meanings for these words when you provide
me with clear other meanings (definitions).
With friendly greetings,
Wim
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 Dec 19 2002 - 22:44:37 GMT