From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Thu Dec 01 2005 - 00:40:46 GMT
> [Arlo previously]
> Tell me Platt, where was the Intellectual level 4 billion years ago?
> Sitting around waiting for the inorganic to "flower", then the biological,
> then the social, so that it could finally apply to something?
You got it.
> [Platt]
> First, the MOQ is a man-made product so it was not "sitting out in space"
> but rather conceived in Pirsig's brain, something you can't admit. Second
> there was no "before time" because it takes time to create. Third,
> everything we know as reality today including experience was there from the
> beginning. Otherwise no Quality, no DQ and no SQ "Although Dynamic
> Quality, the Quality of freedom,creates this world in which we live, these
> patterns of static quality, the quality of order, preserve our world."
> (Lila, 9)
>
> [Arlo]
> This reply makes no sense. You said, in an anti-emergence criticism, that
> your disagreement was that you believed "it was all there from the
> beginning". What "it" was all there?
Experience, i.e. Quality.
> You say here all "experience" was
> there from the beginning (although your Pirsig quote says nothing of the
> sort). So tell me, was my experience of writing this email "there from the
> beginning"? Was my Harley "there from the beginning"?
Experience = Dynamic Quality. Your experience is DQ and yes it was there
there from the beginning, as was the DQ for Mr. Harley or whoever
assembled the first Harley motorcycle.
> [Arlo previously quoting Pirsig]
> "That is, we don't perform religious rituals because we believe in
> God. We believe in God because we perform religious rituals."
>
> [Platt]
> Yes. There is a sequence in growth. Some call it evolution.
>
> [Arlo]
> Pirsig did. But your reply misses the entire point of this entire quote
> (not reprinted above). Intellectual level "ideas" according to Pirsig
> emerge from collective social activity.
Nonsense. Intellectual level "ideas" are created by individuals responding
to DQ. That's why you shouldn't execute a criminal who is no threat to
society. Or did you miss that part?
> As I've been saying from day one, the MOQ shows that the emergence of
> "higher order organisms" (next level up) derives from collective activity
> on the previous level. Then, what we consider "individuals" on that newly
> emerged level, in collective activity, give rise to an even "higher order
> organism". This is explained very clearly in Lila.
Nonsense. Pirsig explained that in the MOQ all "organisms" exist only in
the material world, all societies (and ideas) exist only in the mental
world.
> [Arlo previously]
> Finally, Pirsig said on the emergent relationship between the levels, "An
> excellent analogy to the independence of the levels, Phaedrus thought, is
> the relation of hardware to software in a computer." In your world, the
> software program was always there, waiting for hardware to apply itself to.
> In Pirsig's, it had emerged Dynamically.
>
> [Platt]
> Which can first, the software or the hardware?
>
> [Arlo]
> Hardware on one level supports the emergence of software on the next. That
> is, on the biological level, cells are software and atoms are hardware. On
> the social level, cells become hardware to the emergent "I" (this is
> explained also very clearly in Lila). On the intellectual level, social
> level individuals become hardware for the newly emerged intellect-software.
Man, you are really stretching it now. What hardware supported atoms?
> So, if your question is, which came first, the intellectual software that
> is "the MOQ" or the hardware (that is collective social activity), the
> answer is the hardware. But, since according to the MOQ, the software is on
> a higher moral level, that the hardware "comes first" is no more important
> than saying that your "biological body comes first before Platt". "Platt"
> is a software program running on collective cellular activity, which must
> come first. But the socially constructed software that is "Platt" is at a
> higher level than the cell collective that underlies it.
And you continue to blow up that lead balloon.
> Just as the MOQ, or calculus, or gravity is at a higher level on the MOQ
> than "Platt".
Nonsense. Nothing is higher than the experience of you, me, and the man
over there behind the tree. Quality has us all, everyone -- past, present
and future..
Platt
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 : Thu Dec 01 2005 - 04:40:17 GMT