Re: MD Patterns (and consciousness)

From: David Morey (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Sun Jun 06 2004 - 15:48:29 BST

  • Next message: Mark Steven Heyman: "Re: MD Ronald Reagan"

    Hi J

    There is surely some lower quality inorganic
    pattern (gravity/matter ) defeating a higher quality organic
    pattern (my cat) when a tree fell on him and made him flat.
    If only some higher level conscious intervention
    had cut down the rotting tree!

    regards
    David M

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "johnny moral" <johnnymoral@hotmail.com>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 9:26 PM
    Subject: Re: MD Patterns (and consciousness)

    > Leland wrote:
    > >The value of the table can increase after the axe falls if you're caught
    in
    > >a blizzard with no source of heat other than fire, and you've run out of
    > >firewood. All of a sudden, the table stops being valuable as "something
    to
    > >set your stuff on" and becomes valuable as a way to keep from freezing to
    > >death.
    >
    > Right, if we expect it to burn and keep us warm.
    >
    > >We keep talking about the "patterns of the table" when we should be
    talking
    > >about the "patterns of value that the table embodies".
    >
    > I don't see a difference. All patterns are patterns of value, the value
    > being that patterns can be expected to continue. If there is no
    expectation
    > of a pattern continuing, there is no more pattern and no value.
    >
    > >Time, as such, is nothing but a valuable convention (like mathematics).
    > >Time is a model we humans build to wrap our heads around the concept of
    > >causality.
    >
    > Well, being takes time, that's what the "ing" does, it implies a pattern
    > continuing into the future from the past. If anything is, it is in time.
    >
    > >Value doesn't necessarily come from the repetition of static patterns
    over
    > >time. If so, we'd still be swinging from trees (or swimming in the
    > >primordial soup).
    >
    > Nah, there's too many patterns, patterns are constantly being created by
    > their interaction with other patterns. As consciousness becomes conscious
    > of more and more patterns its consciousness grows and value increases as
    the
    > patterns are repeated. When two patterns conflict, the more valuable,
    more
    > expected one repeats and thwarts the weaker pattern so that something
    > unexpected happens, the weaker pattern is not realized and something else
    is
    > realized (not randomly, but according to so many other patterns). If that
    > happens often enough, it becomes the new expected pattern, and it stops
    > being moral to swing from trees and becomes moral to walk on the ground.
    >
    > >For better or worse, and I can't fully understand or explain it, static
    > >patterns DO evolve in response to Dynamic Quality. This malleability
    allows
    > >the slow climb from the Big Bang to planetary systems; from the
    primordial
    > >soup to the guy making soup in his microwave.
    >
    > How else was it going to evolve?
    >
    > >>Yes, patterns emerge from the wake of the cutting edge, but they are
    > >>generally the same patterns that were there before. 99.99999% of the
    > >>time, things stay pretty much as they were from moment to moment. The
    > >>table emerged from the wake of the cutting edge just like it was, albeit
    a
    > >>little older, with a few fewre carbon 14 atoms or whatever. And if you
    > >>had taken a hatchet to it, then the pattern of hatchets destroying
    tables
    > >>is stronger than the pattern of the table staying as it was.
    > >
    > >By your own description, 99.99999% of the time they are NOT exactly the
    > >same from moment to moment.
    >
    > No, they pretty much are. I'm talking instantaneous moment, from now to
    > now. Things are pretty much the same, huh? And the changes that did
    happen
    > changed according to expected patterns.
    >
    > >Reality is not some static entity that changes grudgingly, it is a
    dynamic
    > >flow where static patterns need to hold on for dear life.
    >
    > Reality is always changing, and bears no grudge, but patterns DO change
    > grudgingly. The value of patterns is in their not changing, in their
    being
    > patterns. If they had no preference for continuing themselves, then the
    > universe would become an unordered chaotic mess with no life in it, no
    > consciousness. Patterns are a conscious moral desire to repeat, that's
    why
    > they repeat and things are stable and ordered and predictable.
    >
    > >Reread Lila, the part about the "Static Latch" theory. Dynamic Quality is
    > >ALWAYS at work, through all four levels simultaneously. Existing static
    > >patterns evolve in response to the force of DQ, but if they cannot
    maintain
    > >their evolved state by latching onto a new static pattern, then they
    > >degenerate at least as far as they've evolved (if not further, if the
    > >previous static latch cannot maintain it any further).
    >
    > That's fine as a way to describe how patterns change. I would say that
    > patterns are regularly being thwarted by other patterns, and if those
    other
    > patterns are strong and regular enough, then the original pattern stops,
    as
    > it is no longer the expectation, and a new expectation takes its place.
    > Thus things can evolve or devolve, and which word we use is up to us.
    >
    > >Our concept of time (to get back to the topic) is a fiction, but an
    > >extremely advantageous one to date, if you'll pardon the expression.
    >
    > I think actually that time is one of the most basic primary attributes,
    > central to existence and consciousness. Not a fiction at all, unless you
    > consider existence and consciousness also to be fictions.
    >
    > Johnny
    >
    > _________________________________________________________________
    > Get fast, reliable Internet access with MSN 9 Dial-up - now 3 months FREE!
    > http://join.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/
    >
    >
    >
    > 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 : Sun Jun 06 2004 - 16:11:10 BST