From: johnny moral (johnnymoral@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Aug 19 2003 - 22:04:08 BST
Hi Bo,
>Hi Johnny
>19 Aug. johnny moral wrote:
>
> > Is there a difference between "intersubjective agreement" and the
> > mythos?
>
>Provided I understand what you mean - and the "inter" prefix puzzles
>me, why not just "subjective" - I think not. No difference seen from the
>intellectual level of the MOQ, seen from the MOQ "level" however, but
>let me expound ...when I get a word in ;-).
"Subjective" implies one person's belief, even an insane person's. Since we
know an insane person is not in the mythos, it takes lots of people (all
people) having an agreement between them to define sanity and define the
mythos, hence, "inter-subjective agreement". I think we say "inter-" just
to make it sound more global, agreement between most everyone, rather than
just two people who happen to agree but who might both be insane.
> > Intersubjective agreement can be a priori, right?
>
>A priori means "in itself" or independent of experience, no?
I always read it as "already existing", or "prior". I just meant to
challenge Platt's idea that intersubjective agreement is something that we
seek after we have experienced something to find out what it was we just
experienced, or to determine the truth. I mean to point out that we already
know it.
> > It doesn't have to
> > be sought while seeking truth, rather, it is forced upon us before we
> > even realize that we have considered it
>
>I think you are describing logic rather that a self-evident argument.
I'm describing the mythos.
> > It sure is assy9 to think
> > that we don't already know what we agree about. We agree about so
> > much - water flowing downhill, rocks being rocks, tigers being tigers.
> > You don't have to ask about it all the time.
>
>I guess the "don't" don't belong, or ...?
No, it belongs. Platt was imagining having to ask his neighbor if that is a
tiger to find out what the intersubjective agreement is, I suggest that the
mythos usually educates us about tigers before we encounter them. But if it
hasn't, then yeah, we have to ask.
> > Also, the 'which came first' thing is subtle too: the idea of the rock
> > and the rock appear simultaneously. The rock won't appear unless the
> > idea is there, but the idea won't happen without a reason, a need for
> > a rock being there.
>
>From the said MOQ "level" view - the "idea/rock" aggregate is an
>intellectual pattern, as real as static pattern comes, but they do not
>exist separately. Wait! Hold you fire!
I like the "idea/rock aggregate" phrase. I agree they do not exist
separately. It's almost like SOM or materialism, except that the rock
doesn't exist if there is no idea of it. But if there is, it does, and
there should be if there should be.
> > You can't just have an idea for a rock without a
> > good reason, rocks don't materialize in the middle of the table just
> > because you might imagine a rock
>
>The inorganic pattern of granite or marble or whatever is as REAL as
>all patterns of all static levels ..not least the intellectual pattern of
>an
>idea versus the material thing. In this sense your observations are
>right.
But, in some other sense, not?
> > there, there has to be a rock there
> > in the mythos, an intersubjective agreement that a rock should be
> > there, before anyone can have an ontologically material idea that a
> > rock is there. The intersubjective agreement is based entirely on SQ,
> > a common mythos.
>
>...but I'm afraid you are repeating the pre-moqish observations that
>Phaedrus of ZMM (who looked at it from SOM at that time) made
>about "mythos" and all that. Useful to arrive at the MOQ, but
>afterwards messing it up thoroughly.
Please explain?
>IMO
>Bo
Going without saying,
Johnny
_________________________________________________________________
<b>Get MSN 8</b> and enjoy automatic e-mail virus protection.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
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 : Tue Aug 19 2003 - 22:04:37 BST