Re: MD The Individual Level

From: David Morey (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Mon May 03 2004 - 20:31:39 BST

  • Next message: David Morey: "Re: MD DQ/SQ, myticism and the organic conception of nature"

    Joe:The individual sentient is not built in layers

    This book argues the case against this:
    The Origins and History of Consciousness

    by Neumann
         Erich

    he shows how myths describe the struggle for individuality

    take a look....

    regards

    David M

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Joe" <jhmau@sbcglobal.net>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 4:23 AM
    Subject: Re: MD The Individual Level

    > On 30 April 2004 9:16 PM David Buchanan writes to Steve:
    > Steve said:
    > Both are included in the whole person since a person is a forest of
    > static patterns, but I don't see how the social level is included in
    > the intellectual level which I understand as including only patterns of
    > thought.
    >
    > dmb says:
    > The myths, rituals and languages that developed as parts of the social
    level
    > are included in the intellect. Thinking, in the intellectual sense, comes
    > only AFTER these social level patterns have evolved and is a necessary
    > partof the intellect. We can't exclude social level patterns of values
    from
    > the
    > intellect any more than we can exclude the brain or the atoms of which it
    is
    > made. All levels are included in the fourth. Think about it, Steve. How
    > could it be otherwise. Thoughts without language? No way.
    >
    > Hi DMB, Steve, and all:
    >
    > joe: IMO the social order does not set the table for the intellectual
    order.
    > I can not see that myths, rituals, and languages are a preparation for
    > evolution. The individual sentient is not built in layers. If an
    > individual sentient seems to be more organic, or social, or intellectual
    > this seems to be based on a center of gravity, not on evolution.
    >
    > If I accept a metaphysics based on science (understood as epistemological
    > pluralism, where the bounds of the laboratory extend beyond the chemistry
    > lab), I feel that I am committed to further evolution. The thrust of my
    > studies would indicate that over time sentients are getting better and
    > better.
    >
    > If I accept a metaphysics based on an evolutionary morality including a
    > mystical experience of DQ SQ quality, then my basis for sentients becoming
    > better is morality. Over time sentients may be getting worse by being
    more
    > immoral.
    >
    > Joe Maurer
    >
    >
    >
    > 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 : Mon May 03 2004 - 20:36:41 BST