From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Sun Nov 30 2003 - 14:03:46 GMT
Bo:
The problem stems from wanting to make intellect a quasi-dynamic
level, while it supposed to be a static one (and as such easily defined)
The best example is Mark who thinks he does the MOQ a great
service with his crusade against this person's sober S/O intellect.
Mark may not understand the ramifications, but so does Scott who
sees that an intellect as thoughts (ideas) makes it dynamic and thus
unassimilated. Scott however wants no "mending", but that's another
matter.
Mark 30-11-03: Hello Bo, If i am to prominently figure in your posts, why not
address them to me? Answer: Because you know i have got you by the short and
curly's!
I feel this is why you consistently misrepresent me, because you understand
that my position has coherence between SQ-SQ tension and DQ-SQ evolution at
it's very core.
OK, so what blithering rubbish have you deemed to offer forth today...
Bo: 'The problem stems from wanting to make intellect a quasi-dynamic level,
while it supposed to be a static one (and as such easily defined)'
Mark 30-11-03: The best static description of the Intellect that we have is
the MoQ. In the MoQ, we have both static and Dynamic counterparts - we cannot
have one without the other. Thus, a static description of the Intellect in the
MoQ must refer to a Dynamic component, and a Dynamic description of the
Intellect in the MoQ by definition (it being a description) must accommodate its
static component. And that is exactly what we do.
Bo: 'The best example is Mark who thinks he does the MOQ a great service with
his crusade against this person's sober S/O intellect.'
Mark 30-11-03: As far as i know, i am the only person who has effectively
extruded an easily understandable description of the MoQ from Lila (see, 'The
edge of chaos') which indicates the Dynamic nature of the intellect as an
evolving event stream of static repertoires of patterns in response to DQ, while
simultaneously attaining an increasing level of coherence. Two aspects of one
process in harmony and balance - the Tao.
Bo: 'Mark may not understand the ramifications, but so does Scott who
sees that an intellect as thoughts (ideas) makes it dynamic and thus
unassimilated. Scott however wants no "mending", but that's another
matter.'
Mark 30-11-03: The language in operation is one of patterns of Quality
evolving in response to DQ. DQ is never defined, always beyond description, but
changing our immediate experience all the time. I accept, use, and have tried to
expand this language in an attempt to give people a vocabulary with which to
explore everyday experience in terms of the MoQ.
What have you done Bo? Answer: Never accepted the MoQ and invited needless
criticism and endless debate.
Mark.
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 : Sun Nov 30 2003 - 14:05:35 GMT