Re: MD A bit of reasoning

From: Scott Roberts (jse885@earthlink.net)
Date: Fri Oct 08 2004 - 05:04:32 BST

  • Next message: Daniel Kindred: "Re: MD On Faith"

    Joe,

    > [Joe] Intellect is only one pole of evolution. I find evolution itself the
    > more interesting subject. I envision a sentient equally at a loss to
    explain
    > the origins of organic, social or intellectual levels from the inorganic
    > level. In that sense I have to reject the idea that: "The unique
    difference
    > between intellect and the other levels is that intellect can reflect on
    > itself." I would rather say that there is an increase in self awareness in
    > the different levels. The ability of an individual of each level to
    > interpret and manipulate the DQ which forms the level is an example of
    self-
    > awareness. The tree exhibits different behavior from the rock? The tree
    > feeds. It responds to a force beyond gravity. Once three forms of
    awareness
    > to examine behavior proper to each is present to a sentient then I
    envision
    > a startling jump in self-awareness. Since the sentient is composed of
    three
    > different levels, the self-awareness of each is available for
    consideration.
    > IMO the moral levels, are present to awareness, and logic and behavior
    arise
    > from an awareness of the levels.

    (Have you explored Arthur M. Young? His book The Reflexive Universe talks
    of levels in terms of increasing degrees of freedom.)

    The problem I have with this kind of analysis is: how do the new "forms of
    awareness" come about? We (modernists) make an assumption that needs to be
    questioned. It is that all that exists in earlier times is simpler than in
    later times. Now it is certainly true that what we know about a human is
    more complex than what we know about an earthworm, which is more complex
    than what we know about a rock. But I stuck in the "what we know" to
    suggest that maybe the earthworm that we know is only a fraction of what
    one needs to know to fully appreciate the earthworm. A full understanding
    might reveal ideational aspects as complex as anything else. So, with this
    possibility, all forms of awareness that the human has are there with the
    earthworm, though only some are apparent through empirical investigation.
    This does not imply that an earthworm can think, only that there is
    thinking going on in association with the earthworm (e.g., by its species).

    > [JOE] I envision individuals having a center of gravity in one or the
    other
    > of the levels, and the remaining levels having decreasing influence.
    > Increasing self-awareness is very important! I am very impressed with
    Pirsig
    > using of evolution to moral levels.

    Yes, but as I describe above, that center of gravity may only be as we
    understand it. Sort of like, though we see ourselves from the center, we
    see only the periphery of rocks (or, the rock we see is on the periphery of
    something much greater).

    - Scott

    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 : Fri Oct 08 2004 - 05:41:32 BST