Re: MD Evolution of levels

From: abahn@comcast.net
Date: Fri Sep 12 2003 - 16:35:02 BST

  • Next message: Sam Norton: "Re: MD Evolution of levels"

    Hi Yale,

    For the most part, yes--true. You said, "when in need of relief, fullfillment,
    they seek to hopefully arrive at y." But, from your earlier statements, I think
    you mean they (explorers) are seeking without any idea of where they will
    arrive. Yes?

    allow me to jump ahead, anticipating your conclusions. Would you make an
    analogy of x with Pirsig's SQ and y with DQ?

    regards,
    Andy
    > Hi Andy,
    >
    > Scr-w the Fractal Philosophy paper! What I am talking about is something
    > more basic, as fundamental as anything else people qualitatively and
    > quantitatively do every moment of their existence. They are either
    > exploring new uncharted, possible opportunities, y, of thinking and doing --
    > or corraling themselves into old proven and satisfactory ways of thinking
    > and doing, x. when they are confortable about some x, they stay at x, when
    > in need of relief, fullfillment, they seek to hopefully arrive at y. True?
    >
    > regards, yale
    >
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: <abahn@comcast.net>
    > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    > Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 5:46 AM
    > Subject: Re: MD Evolution of levels
    >
    >
    > > Hi Yale:
    > >
    > > You said: "the mode of real explorers who by definition have abolutely no
    > idea
    > > of how much effort is needed to do their explorations, nor even if they
    > will
    > > succeed, and even if they succeeed wil the exploration havebeen worth it?"
    > >
    > > Andy: Hmmm. Sounds to me like there is not any inherent contradiction
    > between
    > > "real" exploring and taking the easy way out. You are making an
    > assumption that
    > > what I am doing is not "real" exploring. And that for any "real"
    > exploring to
    > > take place I would have to follow a path that goes through your paper
    > along with
    > > a time commitment to reflect upon it. But, "real" explorers have to
    > follow
    > > something, even if it is just a gut instinct, when choosing which paths to
    > > explore. I don't know exactly what it is, but all of your pleading and
    > cajoling
    > > to the list about the merits of your paper and now your insinuation that
    > > explorers MUST travel through it, leave me no doubt that this area of
    > > exploration has little fruitful benefits and is something one should
    > avoid.
    > >
    > > Thanks, but no thanks,
    > > Andy
    > >
    > > Andy
    > > > Fair enough. OTOH, consider this: one of the most interesting things
    > about
    > > > real exploring as compared with the phony-baloney kind is that the more
    > > > unclear and dangerous the territory to be explored, whether darkest
    > Africa
    > > > two centuries ago, or digging down deep into the gold mine of
    > metaphysics,
    > > > the less likely it is that the explorer knows well enough exactly when
    > to
    > > > stop moving along path 1, then which way to turn, and how many steps to
    > take
    > > > before again exactly stopping on path 2, turning, taking how many
    > steps...
    > > > So iit is highly probable that Patrick van den Berg was not so much
    > enticed
    > > > as he used and uses a different mode of exploring than you, the mode of
    > > > real explorers who by definition have abolutely no idea of how much
    > effort
    > > > is needed to do their explorations, nor even if they will succeed, and
    > even
    > > > if they succeeed wil the exploration havebeen worth it? As most
    > > > self-described "explorers" are not risk averse, they are not really
    > >
    > > > exploring. In any case, we can all agree that Robert Pirsig was, and
    > (if he
    > > > is with us) still probably is one of the 20th centuries greatest real
    > > > explorers.. YL
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > ----- Original Message -----
    > > > From: <abahn@comcast.net>
    > > > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    > > > Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 11:37 AM
    > > > Subject: Re: MD Evolution of levels
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > > Yale,
    > > > >
    > > > > No problem indeed. But, just to clear something up. I am a dabbler
    > in
    > > > things
    > > > > put to the list that don't entice me to explore them. I am an
    > explorer of
    > > > areas
    > > > > and ideas I have been enticed to explore.
    > > > >
    > > > > Andy
    > > > > > No problem. It was not written for dabblers like you, but rather
    > > > explorers
    > > > > > like Patrick. yale
    > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
    > > > > > From: <abahn@comcast.net>
    > > > > > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    > > > > > Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 8:48 AM
    > > > > > Subject: Re: MD Evolution of levels
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > > Hi Yale,
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Thanks, but I'd rather take the easy way out. :-)
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Andy
    > > > > > > > From: <abahn@comcast.net>
    > >
    > > > > > > > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 5:33 AM
    > > > > > > > Subject: Re: MD Evolution of levels
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Hi Yale,
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > I have read your paper. Or more honestly skimmed it. You
    > seem to
    > > > > > want
    > > > > > > > someone
    > > > > > > > > on the list to confirm your belief that there is a connection
    > > > between
    > > > > > > > Pirsig and
    > > > > > > > > your paper (fractal philosophy). Why don't you just tell us
    > about
    > > > the
    > > > > > > > > connection instead of making us needlessly wait in suspense.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > merely suggesting,
    > > > > > > > > Andy
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Hi Andy, the Fractal Philosophy paper at
    > > > http://yalelands.com/frph.pdf
    > > > > > is
    > > > >
    > > > > > > > meant to be read and commented upon by professional and amateur
    > > > > > philosophers
    > > > > > > > willing to bet some time (expend their to to hopefully get some
    > > > > > worthwhile
    > > > > > > > reward.)
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > And I am sugesting that there is a lot in it about some interest
    > > > aspects
    > > > > > of
    > >
    > > > > > > > hierarchies of levels and levels of hierarchies.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Rather than keep you in suspense about where it might be
    > sympatico
    > > > with
    > > > > > MoQ,
    > > > > > > > permit me to reference comments by one of your memebers who
    > actually
    > > > > > took
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > the time to read and reflect upon it, instead of looking for the
    > > > easy
    > > > > > way
    > > > > > > > out....
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Dear Yale,
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > It was yours, the article? Then my apologies for my harsh
    > comment at
    > > > the
    > > > > > > > beginning at the post about 'the author'. Uhm, let me put it
    > more
    > > > mildly
    > > > > > > > what I said: the old Greek philosophers used this
    > > > dialogue-technique, in
    > > > > > > > which it was true that the writer assumed rather naieve and
    > 'stupid'
    > > > > > > > commenters. The technique you used addresses the reader
    > directly,
    > > > which
    > > > >
    > > > > > > > has the advantage that it can create a more personal touch, but
    > in
    > > > many
    > > > > > > > cases I did't assume the stance you ascribed to your potential
    > > > readers.
    > >
    > > > > > > > And true, the recurring suggestions about the assumed stance of
    > the
    > > > > > > > reader kind of irritated me (which left the reader stupid and
    > the
    > > > author
    > > > > > > > smart!). Anyhow, your style of writing was original and playful.
    > > > Thus,
    > > > > > > > the attempt had DQ, but the it didn't lead (in my humble
    > opinion) to
    > > > a
    > > > > > > > static quality-form it potentially could have.
    > > > > > > > ;-)
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > All the best, Patrick.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > And...
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Dear YL,
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > The pdf-file was interesting, although the ego-blown style of
    > the
    > > > author
    > > > > > > > irritated me. It does have similarities with Pirsig seeing Lila.
    > In
    > > > the
    > > > > > > > café he notices she notices that he is watching her, and she
    > notices
    > > > > > > > that he notices that she notices he is watching her, etc. ad
    > > > infinitum.
    > > > > > > > Like standing between two mirrors, you have a reflection of a
    > > > reflection
    > > > >
    > > > > > > > of a reflection. The fellow of this pdf-file applies a similar
    > > > strategy.
    > > > > > > >
    > >
    > > > > > > > Two things I found particularly interesting:
    > > > > > > > The first is that he uses a mathematical metaphor of the
    > seemingly
    > > > ease
    > > > > > > > of going away from a spot: Any direction is adequate, north,
    > west,
    > > > south
    > > > > > > > or inbetween. Finding a good alternative narrows you options
    > > > > > > > considerably, however. The place you want to go is either north
    > or
    > > > south
    > > > > > > > or another particular direction. What Pirsig says about the
    > > > > > > > hippie-movement is that the hippies were good at walking away
    > from
    > > > the
    > > > > > > > center of the western culture of the sixties- they didn't,
    > however,
    > > > know
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > where to turn to. That's why the movement virtually bleeded to
    > > > death.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > The second thing I found interesting was the notion of aming at
    > > > turning
    > > > > > > > towards turning towards something. It has a relation with the
    > > > concept
    > > > > > > > of free will. What does it mean to turn your attention to
    > something
    > > > (to
    > > > >
    > > > > > > > will something)? In order to do that, you have to change your
    > >
    > > > thinking
    > > > > > > > from this to that (to the topic you want to focus on). And how
    > do
    > > > you
    > > > > > > > initiate this change? By accelareting from some zero-point, so
    > that
    > > > you
    > > > > > > > can accomplish an amount of changing your attention. But how do
    > you
    > > > > > > > start to accelerate? By starting to accelerate you acceleration.
    > > > This
    > > > > > > > leads to an obvious paradox. How is it ever possible to turn
    > your
    > > > > > > > attention towards something? How is free will possible? (This is
    > a
    > > > > > > > version of psychology's homunculi, by the way)
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > The notion of a fractal philosophy is quite big and interesting.
    > > > > > > > Relating such a big idea to the whole edifice of the MoQ seems
    > to me
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > daunting. Nevertheless interesting. Maybe cartesian philosophy
    > (SOM)
    > > > > > > > tries to zoom in on a fractal- hoping someday to see the
    > ultimate
    > > > > > > > building blocks! Pirsig would say: Hey, you're just going in one
    > > > > > > > possible direction. There are others, not only by 'zooming in'
    > but
    > > > by
    > > > >
    > >
    > > > > > > > staying at one level and walk around there, or better: zoom in a
    > bit
    > > > but
    > > > > > > > going to the 'left' simultanously. (Fits into another metaphor
    > of
    > > > > > > > Pirsig: His idea of a chaqautua meaning to deepen the riverpaths
    > of
    > > > our
    > > > > > > > behaviors, instead of creating new ones only to end up in one
    > > > shallow
    > > > > > > > homogenous river.)
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > 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
    > > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > 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
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > 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
    > >
    >
    >
    >
    > 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 : Fri Sep 12 2003 - 16:36:01 BST