Re: MD On Transcendence

From: Joseph Maurer (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Tue Nov 09 2004 - 18:01:42 GMT

  • Next message: Sam Norton: "Fw: MD terror & religion"

    On 8 November 2004 Ham writes to Chuck, David and Mel

    [Ham] The key phrase here is "so it seems." MOQ does not provide us with a
    transcendent reality, it only pretends to. Since I don't want to be
    responsible for keeping Chuck up at night, I'll admit that I may have used
    the word in an earlier posting. It also appeared in the Amazon intervewer's
    question to Sam Harris: "

    Hi Ham, Chuck, David, Mel and all,

    [joe] hi Ham! I'm joe. I had occasion to go to your website as Aristotle's
    proposal of 'essence' is what I grew up with. Morality is an odd subject! I
    want to identify the DQ of each level that Pirsig proposes, and maybe see
    why one level is higher than the other. For the social level I can see
    'existence' (order) as DQ. I agree with you that the "Primary attribute of
    Existence is not Being but difference."

    IMO Evolution proceeds from the inorganic level. Gravity is the DQ of the
    inorganic level. If "the divine one is a negation of negations" does that
    mean that if I see 'purpose' (feeding) as DQ of the organic level that it is
    only a negation of 'gravity'? I want to see gravity composed of three forces
    made manifest by evolution in a moral order, to organic, to social, to
    intellectual. What differentiates the negations? More? Stronger? and where
    does this come from in gravity? Why would the intellectual level which has
    the weakest negation from gravity be the last to manifest in evolution, yet
    be the highest level?

    Joe

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: <hampday@earthlink.net>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 10:00 PM
    Subject: Re: MD On Transcendence

    >
    > Ham to Chuck, David and Mel
    > Hello again, gentlemen.
    >
    > In answer to David's question --
    >> Is there any use for the concept of transcendence
    >> in the MOQ? If not is this an error in the MOQ?
    >> If not an error why not?
    >
    > Chuck replied:
    >> Initially, I say the MoQ leans toward the
    >> intrisically esoteric, rather than the transcendent, but I wonder if
    >> there
    >> isn't a specific exchange, thread or passage which may have birthed such
    >> woolgathering.
    >>
    >> This may keep up me at night.
    >
    > To which Mel provided the following (MOQ approvable) definition for
    > "transcendence":
    >> Thinking in terms of systems,
    >> any system has a meta-system
    >> and moving beyond the system
    >> into the meta is to transcend...
    >>
    >> Thinking in terms of MoQ and
    >> the levels...each levels rules
    >> transcend the prior levels rules.
    >>
    >> So, it is inherently part of MoQ
    >> or so it seems.
    >
    > The key phrase here is "so it seems." MOQ does not provide us with a
    > transcendent reality, it only pretends to.
    > Since I don't want to be responsible for keeping Chuck up at night, I'll
    > admit that I may have used the word in an earlier posting. It also
    > appeared
    > in the Amazon intervewer's question to Sam Harris: "
    >
    >>
    >
    >>
    >> -----Original Message-----
    >> From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
    >> [mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk] On Behalf Of David Morey
    >> Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 11:17 AM
    >> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
    >> Subject: Re: MD On Transcendence
    >>
    >> Hi all
    >>
    >> Is there any use for the concept of transcendence
    >> in the MOQ? If not is this an error in the MOQ?
    >> If not an error why not?
    >>
    >> David M
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> 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
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> 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
    >>
    >
    >
    >
    > 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
    >
    >

    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 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 19:22:38 GMT