Re: MD SOM and the soc/int distinction

From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Wed Jun 11 2003 - 22:25:46 BST

  • Next message: phyllis bergiel: "Re: MD Ethics"

    Dear Sam,

    You asked 23 Apr 2003 15:12:39 +0100:
    'Are you comfortable with the idea that DQ is relative to the position of
    the person experiencing? ie that what is SQ to one might be DQ to another?'

    What is a static pattern of value to one cannot be DQ (the value of change
    to the better) to another. The DQ I experience may differ from the DQ you
    experience, i.e. the (for me) new static pattern of value that's left in the
    wake of my DQ experience may be an old static pattern of value for or vice
    versa. Whether a specific static pattern of value that appears in one's
    experience (e.g. democracy) constitutes progress or degeneration compared to
    previous experience, depends on the evolutionary level of this previous
    experience. If this previous experience contains sociocracy, democracy
    constitutes degeneration; if it contains autocracy, democracy constitutes
    progress.
    So yes, DQ is relative to the static patterns of value you participate in.

    You also wrote 23 Apr:
    'I would say that mythology is level 3 thinking; level 4 thinking operates
    on the basis of the relevant level 3 foundations.'
    in reply to my:
    'Locating mythological thinking in the 4th level, but evolutionary preceding
    rational thinking, myths for me almost by definition refer to low-quality
    intellectual patterns of value.'

    This is not only a matter of different definitions (my definition of the 3rd
    level ruling out 'thinking' at that level). It is also a matter of different
    valuation of mythology.
    We agree that mythological thinking is of lower quality than rational
    thinking, but for you rational thinking needs mythology as its basis. For me
    it doesn't.
    I agree that rational thinking needs presuppositions, but I disagree that
    the relation between 3rd and 4th level is a relationship between
    presuppositions and conclusions. These presuppositions can be taken either
    from pre-rational sources or from post-rational sources, but in any case
    they are just as much part of the 4th level as the rational conclusions
    derived.

    With friendly greetings,

    Wim

    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 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 22:37:24 BST