RE: MD The Intellectual Level

From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Sat Jul 26 2003 - 12:28:49 BST

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "MD Today could be the day"

    Platt,

    No putdown intended, just wanted to flush out starkly, that the "MoQ as
    universal bootstrap" was indeed what certain members are seeking. Call me
    impatient if you like, but whilst I genuinely find the whole enchilada
    interesting, I need to be able to segregate that search from more immediate
    pragmatic value.

    Having said that, my view of any meta-physics is that it will always be an
    "intelllectual pattern", even if it purports to describe the world beyond
    (and including) that pattern, so I cannot see how the argument will ever not
    be recursive.
    (Perhaps I should read Rick's latest.)

    Ian

    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
    [mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]On Behalf Of Platt Holden
    Sent: 25 July 2003 20:14
    To: moq_discuss@moq.org
    Subject: Re: MD The Intellectual Level

    Hi Jonathan, Ian,

    > Hi Ian (+ Rick, Bo and all),
    >
    > In response to your post, all I have to add is AMEN!!!!
    >
    > Jonathan
    >
    > (I don't usually approve of "me too" posts, but in this case your post was
    > so good that I couldn't resist)
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: "Ian Glendinning" <ian@psybertron.org>
    > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    > Sent: Friday, 25 July 2003 18:00
    > Subject: RE: MD The Intellectual Level

    > > Bo, Rick,
    > >
    > > I kind of lose exactly who's quoting who saying what in here.
    > > The circular argument you appear to be having is ....
    > >
    > > (1) MoQ describes Patterns of Quality (including Intellectual ones). (2)
    > > MoQ is itself an Intellectual Pattern. (3) 1 and 2 are "recursive".
    > >
    > > My short response is agreed, and where's the problem ?
    > > (I like self-describing models.)
    > >
    > > If you're looking for a metaphysics that has some holy water sprinkled
    on
    > it
    > > from outside human (intellectual) experience, then MoQ must surely be
    the
    > > most unlikely place to expect to find such an absolutist, objective
    > "thing".
    > >
    > > What is necessary with self-describing models is some bootstrapping. But
    > > this is a pragmatic issue, and the model is valid without any particular
    > > bootstrap.
    > >
    > > Of course anyone whose quest is to find a bootstrap for the whole
    > > universe (multiverses, whatever) will be disappointed with this, but I'm
    > > happy to take any sets of boundary conditions I can find to fit the
    model
    > > consistently anywhere along the cosmic / geologic / biologic /
    > anthropologic
    > > timeline. Seems to work pretty well for me.
    > >
    > > Ian

    If you two are happy to settle for half a loaf, fine. But, that's no
    reason to put down those who seek the whole enchilada.

    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

    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 : Sat Jul 26 2003 - 12:31:22 BST