From: johnny moral (johnnymoral@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Jun 05 2003 - 21:56:01 BST
Hi Platt,
>We don't need SOM any more. The world is a world of concepts--patterns of
>Quality. Patterns only exist as mental abstractions.
So you believe that pre-human history is only a backwards projection of what
must have been? I agree, that's my Creation Theory also, that the world is
created with all its history as it seems to have been, every moment. But my
human sanity compells me to also believe that that the past really happened,
and that the present and future are dependent on it. So I believe that
early molecules formed in the primordial soup, etc, long before any minds
evolved to be aware of them, even though I understand philosphically that it
only happened abstractedly. And I believe that my car will be damaged if I
drive it into a tree, even if I don't see the tree. And that I can't just
take someone else's property and tell them to imagine I didn't, it was only
a mental abstraction anyhow. The world that is is a world of concepts is an
Object - it is a world that objectively exists. For you, me and everyone,
Bush is really the President of the US. Yes it is a pattern of Quality, but
experience isn't felt by experience itself, experience is felt by subjects.
Subjects and Objects are the Son, the Created world, and Quality is the
Father, but the Father needed the Son to experience itself, to exist.
Maybe I'm not sure what we mean by SOM here, I think of it as believing that
things really exist, that I exist, etc. As I'm sure you dont dispute that,
there must be some narrower definition that you are using.
>What is the benefit
>of hanging onto the symbols of "subjects" and "objects" instead of
>"patterns of Quality?" I guess the main benefit is to think like everybody
>else and so get along without making waves..
That's the main benefit, sure, to not be insane, to please people. To value
things appropriately. There are lots of mental hospitals with wards for
people who have taken idealism to debilitating solipsistic conclusions and
denied our shared reality, SOM.
>Dynamic Quality creates patterns of value, not subjects and objects.
But you just said that the patterns are mental abstractions. That implies a
mind, a subject. Yes, that mind is itself a pattern of quality, created by
morality, which is the original source, but we don't live in that original
source, we live in differentiated patterns of quality.
>So yes, the MoQ accounts for SOM, but replaces it with better
>explanation of the how the world is and works.
It augments it, it doesn't replace it. It explains the relationship of
morality to existence, but doesn't throw out existence. I don't understand
what you feel is gained by throwing out SOM, and, can I have your stuff when
you do?
>Remember the platypi?
Actually, no... I forget the original story. I know the metaphor, I think,
is for things that don't fit our beliefs and force us to rethink?
>Who's scoffing? Not me.
I guess it seemed like you were saying you didn't feel this existence was
real.
>How can Quality be created when it takes Quality to create?
Quality that isn't part of creation doesn't exist. I think we agree that in
the beginning was the word, and the word was Quality (which I also still
define as expectation being realized, or just expectation), and out of this
word comes created reality (because it is expected to, it is moral to). But
there isn't any more to quality than what is apparent to us. I don't think
there is a stock of it kept in the basement of the universe, I think it's
all visible and here.
>If you want to stick to SOM, fine. My preference is MoQ. Probably strokes
>my ego to be different that way.
I'm not "sticking to SOM", I am adding an understanding of quality and
morality as the source of reality, while still living life in a real world
containing people and things that really exist, as real as rocks and trees.
I'm sure you are too.
This is the same sort of over-enthusiasm that irks me about people who want
to throw out static quality and just celebrate dynamic quality, or who want
to throw out "social level thinking' and only respect intellectual thinking.
It is just silly, floppy zealotry that isn't thought through. There is
nothing that the MoQ asks us to throw out except silly floppy zealotry
itself.
Johnny
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
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 Jun 05 2003 - 21:57:00 BST