Re: MD FW: The intellectual level and rationality

From: ian glendinning (psybertron@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Nov 27 2005 - 14:13:12 GMT

  • Next message: ian glendinning: "Re: MD 4th level - The more autonomous level."
  • Next message: MarshaV: "Re: MD What's the Problem?"
  • Next message: skutvik@online.no: "Re: MD Emotions and subjectivity"

    Bo, specifically on the points you aimed at me ...

    I asked "so do you have any conception of or any kind of word for
    mental / intellectual considerations beyond SOM ?"
    And you replied
    [QUOTE]
    Beyond SOM are Quality-based consideration (yet another term).

    If you still ask what faculty is beyond all considerations, beyond
    reason, beyond logic, what makes us see something as logical and
    something else as illogical? Or what makes us choose an elegant
    solution instead of a clumsy one, in short what make us strive for
    betterness ... you will see that we end up with Quality. But I'm
    afraid you uphold SOM's metaphysical outlook by seeing thoughts as
    intellect's patterns ... and that the MOQ is another such pattern. Not
    adapting MOQ's outlook which is that thoughts as different from the
    physical is the 4th level's value. The highest and best value there
    is, yet static ...not AS IT REALLY IS!.
    [UNQUOTE]

    My response

    I just call those "quality considerations" MoQ-Intellect (as distinct
    from SOM-Intellect) which is where I came in, That's just linguistic,
    what matters is where these things fit in and relate to the MoQ
    framework. But continuing your points ..

    Like Paul says - Logic is just one specific form of intellectual
    reasoning - much overrated as I've said many times. Elegance,
    betterness are about quality - I'm totally on board with that, that's
    why I'm here - they are / it is an essential addition to our
    intellectual armoury.

    Like all things in the world (objects or thoughts or subjects) I see
    patterns of quality interactions. Thoughts (in the 4th layer) are
    clearly different from the physical (in the 1st), but they are not of
    a fundamentally different world there is no thought-stuff distinct
    from physical-stuff, no neat duality. They are different emergent
    patterns of reality, dynamic and static. Even the things you happily
    call physical (Dr Johnson's rock presumably) are exactly such emergent
    patterns of quality. MoQ provides that unifying framework.

    My physics is 100 years more advanced than yours. But we can drop the
    word physics (you brought it up). I'm OK with the word "reality". You
    mentally equate physics with SOMism, quite unnecessarily.
    Ian

    I am openly a naturalist / physicalist

    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 Nov 27 2005 - 16:08:37 GMT