From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Sat Aug 28 2004 - 06:45:21 BST
Dear David M.,
You wrote 27 Aug 2004 20:59:08 +0100:
'I could imagine a society where we spend/use/give
our money/resources much more wisely & even
pleasurably, but currently rather low quality behaviour
allows people to accumulate money, etc'
O.k., so could I, but then we are dealing with another subject. Not how 3rd
level patterns of value maintain societies and how they evolve, i.e. how DQ
operates at the 3rd level. The subject is then how THE ideal society (i.e. a
symbolic representation of a society that doesn't exist) would look like and
how to decrease the difference between ideal and reality.
How would it look like?
As the ideal (a 4th level pattern of value) cannot be derived from existing
3rd level patterns of value (the ideal describes a situation that doesn't
exist), it must be derived from DQ and/or from the highest quality 4th level
patterns of value we know (the ones migrated farthest towards DQ). We only
experience DQ situational (relative to a specific situation, a specific set
of patterns of value that give way to another set) and not absolute (as a
final goal of all migration of all patterns of value).
THE ideal society for everyone can only be formulated to the extent that
everyone experiences him/herself as being in the same situation, as being
part of one whole, i.e. to the extent that everyone identifies with humanity
as a whole. It will also still be situational. Every time our (humanity's)
patterns of value give way to another set of patterns of value, we have to
formulate a new situational goal, a new ideal.
I can imagine a situation, when homo sapiens was still young, with low
population density, small groups (societies) widely dispersed among huge
amounts of natural resources, low average consciousness and few individuals
aware enough of the possibilites to use those resources for the advancement
of their society, in which accumulating resources in the hands of as few
leaders as possible WAS the ideal. Now that has become an habitual pattern
of value that must give way.
How to decrease the difference between ideal and reality?
4th level patterns of value can only determine the direction of social
evolution. They cannot force its pace. In order to answer this question we
still have to answer the questions how 3rd level patterns of value maintain
societies and how they evolve, i.e. how DQ operates at the 3rd level.
Is this a good answer to what you wrote 26 Jun 2004 13:47:09 +0100:
'I would like to see the case between equality and inequality argued from
both points of view. I think both are inadequate ways of thinking.'? I.e. is
it a good way to distinguish and then combine/connect 3rd and 4th level
perspectives?
With friendly greetings,
Wim
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 : Sat Aug 28 2004 - 07:04:26 BST