From: mark maxwell (laughingpines@yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Sat Sep 10 2005 - 22:14:39 BST
Mark, Scott,
(Mark, I think this is the same exchange we're having
in the Intellect
Fallacy thread with Bo.)
Mark:
Hi Ian, There looks to be allot of overlap. I did not
intend for this to happen, but, as the DEsRIP thread
was initiated by me as side-line from IFT with Bo it's
my fault. Sorry. I was hoping DEsRIP would take off as
a base line. Silly me! ;)
Scott said
MOQ vocabulary of "responding to DQ" is unnecessarily
strained.
I say Pirsig spends some time explaining that his
choice of language
of causation, for static patterns valuing and
responding to dynamic
patterns was just that - linguistic. (Several of us
clearly agree he
missed some tricks in arriving at his definitions and
explanations of
intellect, leaving at least some confusions over its
statics /
dynamism.)
Mark:
This is coming close to, 'There is nothing but
language' stuff Ian?
I'll repeat one thing (I'm still happy with your terse
DESRIP summary
Mark) - but we have a meta-problem - which levels we
are talking IN
and ABOUT at any given time.
Mark:
Evolution sorts that out: All levels are
intellectually described but experienced differently
due to the intellectually valuable notion of
evolution.
Yes all patterns (in any level) are
"symbolic" in any level where they are "expressed". We
have levels
which capture the ontology of what is being expressed
and ontologies
in the levels of expressions themselves. At some
levels we have (long
term) static expressions of dynamic things. (Almost
nothing is truly,
eternally static BTW, except perhaps some level of
expression of the
MoQ Framework itself ?)
Ian
Mark:
Anthony suggests the alternative term, 'stable' in
replace of static. I like this, because i very often
think of DQ as an undivided event stream from which a
divided stream of stable patterns are chosen
aesthetically.
The aesthetic nature of the divided stream (sq) allows
for more than symbolic experiences of reality: social
patterns like justice and law can be aesthetically
pleasing when they serve society well, (The NHS, BBC
for example) and poor when divisive and unjust (the
Poll Tax) and we also avoid your meta-problem?
Thoughts?
Mark
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
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 Sep 10 2005 - 22:35:23 BST