From: Joe (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Fri Jul 18 2003 - 20:09:17 BST
On 16 July 2003 1:44 PM Johnny writes:
Johnny:
1. Doesn't the MoQ say that the 4th level patterns exist on top of 3rd level
patterns the way a novel sits on top of a computer? The intellectual level
doesn't sit on top of 2nd level patterns (people). They don't come out of
individuals, they come out of society and are about society. They help a
society find food, not an individual find food. An individual uses
biological patterns of intellegence and repeats social patterns to find
food. Is this wrong? Please address the novel/computer metaphor as it
relates to the 3rd and 4th levels. I think it clarifies the difference
between thinking in a biological sense and thinking in an intellectual
sense.
joe: it is difficult for me to address your points one by one. I get lost
in the details of what I want to say. I think the meaning of the analogy of
novel/computer is that differences in existence can occupy the same
dimensions. Different moral orders exist in the same individual.
One way to distingujish the moral orders is asking the question What is
directing my actions? Can I jump naked from a high ledge and not hurt
myself? Inorganic order-gravity. Can I find food? Organic order-purpose.
Can I procreate and get along with others? Social order-existence. Can I
knowlingly add to my individuality? Intellectual order-dynamic quality. I
choose to hurt myself finding food. I cannot procreate and just love
myself. I cannot add to my individuality by using the existence of another
violently, only by enduring his behavior toward me, remembering what I know,
do I become more of an individual.
MoQ point of view, I know the undefined. I know and respond to gravity,
purpose, existence, dq, but I can't define them. I develop a theory of how
I know, an instinctive sense of reality, intuition to distinguish them. I
am aware of patterns, words, but my experience sometimes bewilders me. My
DNA creates an awareness and memory where I can manipulate and store
patterns, and use words to express them.
Johnny:
2. Instead of saying that all the patterns exist as intellectual patterns of
different levels, isn't it better to use the word consciousness or awareness
rather than intellect, thus avoiding having to use the confusing phrase
"intuitive intellect" to distinguish consciousness from enduring ideas, and
saving the term intellect to use for thoughts about society, thoughts only
possible after the establishment of the third level?
joe: I want to use a word to describe the activity in my awareness. I will
use the word 'wiseacre' as a verb. I owe Gurdjieff a nod for this word.
The Greeks pointed a finger at, and emphasized my ability to wiseacre. I
have built machines, written novels, written constitutions, developed
theories about everything. I am so pleased by my wiseacring I have
forgotten the moral orders. Everything has become topsy-turvy in my S/O
awareness.
I agree with you that an awareness of patterns is better than saying "That
all patterns exist as intellectual patterns of different levels." Much has
been gained, but more has been lost by wiseacring.
A gain-the manipulation of mythos, emphasized by the Greeks to create the
machines of modern culture by awareness wiseacring. I see "intuitive
intellect" acting prior to awareness. The moral orders stand, wiseacring
not withstanding.
Joe
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 Jul 18 2003 - 20:05:53 BST