RE: MD The SOL fallacy (or Blind mans buff)

From: mark maxwell (laughingpines@yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Sun Sep 11 2005 - 23:21:04 BST

  • Next message: Case: "Re: MD Consciousness/MOQ, definition of"

    Hi Mark, (+hopefully Bo)

    Mark 11-9-05:
    Hi Jos, first off i want to say that I'm using Yahoo
    and I'm not used to the way it goes about its
    business. It has come as a bit of a surprise to find
    that old e-mails can drift in way after far newer ones
    have arrived. This plays merry hell with sequencing
    but it's not my fault! I certainly don't like it.

    Jos:
    You repeat again that a SOL (as opposed to the
    generally accepted moq intellectual level) predicts
    that you/me distinction is only possible
    by the use of intellect, and thus SOL cannot be
    correct as this distinction is clearly apparent at all
    other static levels. (please confirm/clarify)

    Mark:
    As far as i understand Bodvar's position, SOM is
    Quality's intellect. Previous to SOL, Bodvar called
    his metaphysics SOLAQI which stands for, Subject
    Object Logic As Quality's Intellect. In evolutionary
    time, pre-SOLAQI people heard voices in their heads
    which they named Gods. I've no idea if this means
    people did not understand a difference between
    themselves and others? I get the impression Bodvar
    places a high premium upon this being so for some
    reason, but you will have to ask Bodvar.

    Jos:
    What I am missing, is why you say that an MOQ that
    incorporates SOL
    cannot
    distinguish between you and me, below intellect.
    Bodvar agreed with me that in his view, non linguistic
    comparison (or
    biological awareness) is completely compatible with
    SOL.
    i.e., he agrees that you/me distinction happens
    independently of
    intellect,
    and thus the intellectual level still does not need
    necessarily include
    anything aside from linguistic subject object
    distinctions. (Bo, you
    now
    please confirm, if you are listening)

    Mark:
    The suggestion that Humans had no biological or Social
    differential awareness pre-SOLAQI is totally absurd,
    so i should be very surprised if Bodvar claimed
    otherwise.
    The MOQ, rather like Buddhist thought, indicates the
    illusory nature of all you/me distinctions precisely
    because the Intellect is free from Social and
    Biological differentiations. The only differentiations
    the Intellect recognises are those of its own
    aesthetic choosing, and they are many and manifold in
    nature.

    Buddha:
    O how they cling and wrangle, some who claim
    For preacher and monk the honored name!
    For, quarreling, each to his view they cling.
    Such folk see only one side of a thing.

    Jos:
    My second difficulty is that my questions at the end,
    were intended to push you into a corner, somehow you
    escaped (which I was frustrated by) so I will be more
    honest in my approach;

    Mark:
    I had no idea this was your strategy Jos. For my part,
    i should like to tell you i wish to be completely open
    and up for debate. I'm not playing games; I'm not
    trying to have fun. I want to understand.

    Jos:
    2 options, either:

    1)If a static level includes nothing extra to the
    types of awareness that resides there (which I think
    you agreed with) and SOL is an accurate
    description of the types of awareness that exist at
    the intellectual level (which you didn't disagree
    with), then the intellectual level contains
    nothing extra to the SOL?????
    (I think a Venn diagram would show this best, but do
    you see that as far as this argument goes I have no
    really strong motive to reject Bo's theories.)

    Mark:
    Your conclusions are correct. Bodvar insists upon the
    premises you present to me, but i disagree with
    Bodvar's premises. So, i disagree with your
    conclusion.

    Jos:
    or

    2)If you had answered that static levels were not
    defined by the awareness type that exits there, then
    you have a get out, but must then come up with
    an example of a constituent part of the intellectual
    level that is not related to awareness of it. I cant
    think of one and sincerely request your assistance!

    Much better regards

    Jos

    Mark:
    I agree a static level is defined by the awareness
    type we have of it.
    The awareness type at the intellectual level is
    non-binary free-floating symbolic manipulation.
    Far from Binary actually; the variety of manipulations
    at the intellectual level thrill us aesthetically.
    This aesthetic thrill is the awareness we have at the
    intellectual level methinks.

    Mark

                    
    ___________________________________________________________
    How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
    snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.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 : Sun Sep 11 2005 - 23:46:22 BST