Re: MD New Age MOQ?

From: Joseph Maurer (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Fri Nov 04 2005 - 20:19:34 GMT

  • Next message: Scott Roberts: "Re: MD Quality, subjectivity and the 4th level"

    On Monday 31 October 2005 08:14 AM GMT Mark writes to David:

    MD Chaos and its role in Evolution

    <snip>

    David:

    What do we mean by chaos?

    Mark:

    This is one of the questions which most concerns me at the moment. I can
    tell you what I don't mean by chaos:

    1. Chaos theory.

    2 DQ

    I don't mean chaos theory because discerning apparent underlying patterns of
    behaviour in fluid or non-linear systems is to discern structured or
    conditioned sq.

    I don't mean DQ because i think chaos is patterned but unstructured.

    So, what is chaos then?

    My working definition is, 'catastrophic collapse of evolving self organizing
    sq'.

    David:

    Can anything happen in a chaotic event?

    Mark:

    Chaos usually means an end to progressive evolution. Chaotic events put back
    evolution to a previous latched state from which evolution begins afresh.
    That fresh start is down to DQ, not chaos.

    David:

    Does chaos imply infinite possibilities?

    DM

    Mark:

    I don't believe so. That sounds more like DQ. Chaotic events exhibit a
    conditioned sq nature.

    After the last few days i think i can frame it like this:

    We are dealing with two levels of evolution:

    1. Cosmic.

    2. Human creativity.

    2 is the cutting edge of 1. This is something we need to get straight; we
    don't observe evolution as happening without ourselves, we are participating
    in the latest phase of evolution - Human creativity.

    This is where secondary sq ontology may come in, because chaos seems to be a
    feature of these events; chaos emerges when a cutting edge secondary
    ontology event becomes a 'catastrophic collapse of evolving self organizing
    sq'.

    <snip>

    I'm having a problem cutting off where secondary ontological events begin
    and end. The best i can do here is to discern a center out from which the
    event radiates. This may nullify the concept of beginning and end somewhat.

    Mark

    Hi Mark, David, Bo and All

    IMO one of problems with the term 'Quality' is the lack of a vocabulary to
    describe it. Before Isaac Newton 'gravity' lacked a vocabulary to describe
    it. Everyone experienced what gravity did. His law helped to make it a topic
    of learning and description.

    For evolution, perennial philosophy or esoteric philosophy or esoteric
    Christianity world wide uses two main laws to help in discussions. For every
    manifestation three forces are necessary, force 1 force 2 and force 3, or
    +, -, and 0 or active, passive, and neutralizing. IMO Chaos occurs when the
    third force is minimal or missing or changing. Quality is an experience of
    the relationship of the three forces. Balance seems to be the ideal of
    quality. This implies goal or purpose. Many questions!

    To describe the levels of evolution the law of seven 1,2,3,4,5,6,and 7 which
    indicates a difference in steps and levels and the intervals between them is
    helpful. An example of the law of seven is the sound -- octave, and the
    light -- spectrum.

    With regard to the two levels of evolution: Maurice Nicoll in his
    Commentaries describes how sentient activity which has as a neutralizing
    force cosmic evolution, is different from sentient activity which has as a
    neutralizing force human creativity. Maurer can't control cosmic evolution
    e.g. the tsunami, or his own actions with cosmic evolution as the
    neutralizing force. I can control Maurer's actions with evolution of human
    creativity as the neutralizing force. Two very different points of view. IMO
    S/O, Cosmic/Creative, Intellectual/Social are valuable in pointing to
    sentient activity from different evolutionary models. Don't ask me what
    evolution means :) Thanks, Mark, for stirring the pot!

    Joe

    Mark also writes to Bo

    > The Black Knight (for it is he):
    > Mark however, represents a NewAge-ish interpretation
    > with a dynamic (read spiritual) intellectual level and
    > is more tempting, but a completely dead end.
    >
    > Mark:
    > I've researched what is meant by 'New Age' and it
    > turns out there is no agreement as to what this term
    > means. It means many different things from believing
    > crystals to have healing powers, to theistic or
    > philosophical monisms.
    > Now, for someone like Black Knight to then suggest a
    > system of thought to be All of the above '-ish' is
    > therefore freaking absurd isn't it? That's like
    > saying, "This is a bit like that which we have no
    > agreement upon." Mad.
    >
    > So, why is Skutvik quick to slap the label 'New Age'
    > on the sweet spot? Is he trying to dismiss something
    > offhand without taking the trouble to enquire?
    > Skutvik? Do THAT? Shurely shome mishtake?
    >
    > I mean, the sweet spot exists as a goal of artistic
    > endeavour, (if one is happy to accept sport and
    > motorcycle maintenance as artistic endeavour - oh!
    > Wait a moment? Isn't the title of RMP's 1975 book 'Zen
    > and the 'Art' of motorcycle maintenance'? No! Sorry. I
    > get confused sometimes! Must be all that symposium!)
    > and the sweet spot is the goal of scientific enquiry
    > (The 'best' machine and its operational behaviour is
    > modelled and described in mathematical terms with the
    > sweet spot as its descriptive goal)
    > New Age?
    > Is Skutvik telling us that mechanics are not aware of
    > what constitutes a quality machine? Of what science
    > has to say regarding optimum performance and
    > maintenance? Is Skutvik telling us to forget about
    > quality because quality is New Age?
    >
    > And then people REALLY wonder why the man is derided
    > so?
    >
    > Mark

    [Joe] I do not have a copy of Mark's 'MD Chaos and its role in Evolution'
    of October 31, so I have added my remarks in replying to MD New Age MOQ.
    Pretty tacky on my part, but I am not computer literate and I hit the reply
    button to send a mail.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > ___________________________________________________________
    > 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 -
    >
    > 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 -

    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 Nov 04 2005 - 23:15:26 GMT