Re: MD Quality, subjectivity and the 4th level

From: David M (davidint@blueyonder.co.uk)
Date: Fri Nov 11 2005 - 19:30:16 GMT

  • Next message: David M: "Re: MD A Question of Balance / Rules of the Game"

    Hi Bo

    Actually you can sense society take a look
    at any great building, and for a bit of intellect
    read a good book, this is the advantage you get
    when you have 4 levels of SQ to work/play with.

    Still can't see why everything on the 4th level
    equals SOM unless you define intellectvery narrowly.
    Lets say intellect is about using concepts. You can
    split these into those by intuition and those by postulation
    as per Anthony's thesis. The latter have been dominated
    by an SO metaphysics, but as the MOQ and other examples
    show this is not a necessity. Also see my other post today
    in a new thread.

    DM

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: <skutvik@online.no>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 8:22 PM
    Subject: Re: MD Quality, subjectivity and the 4th level

    > David M.
    >
    > 9 Nov. you wrote:
    >
    >> You said: An aside:
    >> I'm aware that strictly seen the "mindish" part of the MOQ begins with
    >> the social level (according to the known method of "encasing the SOM)
    >> but this never works, the mind/matter enigma is just moved to the
    >> bio/socio couple.
    >
    >> DM: What's wrong with 4 levels of SQ as laid down by DQ activeon all
    >> levels? The SQ just appears at different levels, inorganic like
    >> falling, organic like growing, social involving co-operation or even
    >> culture, intellectual involving the evolution of culture.
    >
    > Does it look like I say there's something wrong with the 4 static
    > levels and DQ active on all levels? The thing is that (Pirsig says)
    > that the SOM is to be encased by the MOQ and his method is
    > that of the two lower levels=objects (or objective) and the two
    > upper=subjective (or subjective).
    >
    > At first this looked patent, one can sense matter and living things
    > while societies and ideas cannot be sensed, but it does not really
    > cover the whole of SOM. For instance you say that the organic is
    > about growing and - yes - life is all about growing and multiplying
    > and to this day no-one has explained life, thus organic value is
    > not in the same league as inorganic value ...except in that
    > platitudinous sense.
    >
    > There are more discrepancies, but I don't know if this is your
    > point
    >
    > Bo.
    >
    >
    >
    > 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 : Fri Nov 11 2005 - 19:59:32 GMT