Re: MD Measuring values

From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Mon Jan 05 2004 - 00:42:55 GMT

  • Next message: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com: "Re: MD Measuring values"

    Hi Mark,

    Hi Platt,
    > Maybe what you are recognising here is that higher levels are more open to
    > DQ and therefore evolving faster? I have always felt this provides a good
    > argument for the levels in the first place: The higher the level the faster
    > it evolves.

    I wonder why an increase in the speed of evolution necessarily makes
    numerical measurement of values inoperative?

    Mark 5-1-04: Hi Platt, I have misunderstood your enquiry. Sorry.
    I don't think there can be a numerical evaluation of values, because
    numerical measurement is an aesthetic sense of proportion invented by Human intellect.
    I do not feel these proportions are 'out there' to be discovered, but are
    mapped around experience in a hyper-linguistic sense.
    In short, we cannot rely on intellectual creations to measure all values,
    even if they share in the total harmonic nature of reality SQ-SQ coherence?

    > Also, that which measures value is a five fold entity, so
    > depending on how you are configured at any instant in time and depending on
    > the overall coherence of all patterns determines value. Basically that
    > amounts to go with the flow?

    Measure of value is a five fold entity? I can account for three folds--an
    observer, an observed and a measurement. But what are the other two?

    Thanks Mark,
    Platt

    Mark 5-1-04: The five fold entity i have in mind is
    Inorganic/Biological/Social/Intellectual and DQ. I am all these, so are you, and we are connected at
    our evolutionary roots and via DQ.
    When we/I measure inorganic value we do so as a five fold entity - unless we
    are bungy jumping, in which case we get pretty close to feeling our inorganic
    nature in full dominance?! ;) I also imagine bungy jumping to be pretty
    Dynamic?
    Here, many people may interject with an Idealist interpretation of what i am
    saying? I would argue that our Intellectual coherence shares a commonality
    with all structures whether they be inorganic, organic, etc. So, to appreciate
    the intellectual aesthetic nature of everything is to share and participate in
    the inorganic/organic/social aesthetic of the continuum. In the MoQ, there is
    rather less differentiation and division than in many other philosophies?

    All the best,
    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 : Mon Jan 05 2004 - 00:43:38 GMT