Re: MD Evolution of levels

From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Fri Sep 12 2003 - 19:42:37 BST

Next message: David MOREY: "Re: MD a little thing..."

Previous message: David MOREY: "Re: MD Meaningful cosmology?"
In reply to: Yale Landsberg: "Re: MD Evolution of levels"
Next in thread: Yale Landsberg: "Re: MD Evolution of levels"
Reply: Yale Landsberg: "Re: MD Evolution of levels"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Hi
could you say something about the relationship of fractals
to dynamic quality?

DM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yale Landsberg" <yale_landsberg@yalelands.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 11:08 PM
Subject: Re: MD Evolution of levels

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

Next message: David MOREY: "Re: MD a little thing..."
Previous message: David MOREY: "Re: MD Meaningful cosmology?"
In reply to: Yale Landsberg: "Re: MD Evolution of levels"
Next in thread: Yale Landsberg: "Re: MD Evolution of levels"
Reply: Yale Landsberg: "Re: MD Evolution of levels"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Sep 12 2003 - 19:51:13 BST