Re: MD Carriers of information

From: Jonathan B. Marder (
Date: Thu Sep 17 1998 - 09:13:39 BST

Hi Troy, and Squad,

>[snip] i cringe at the whole carrier idea. carriers are
>results of platypi, and i feel MOQ does away with them. let me say
>i've been thinking about love lately. love and value seem to be very
>the same in MOQ. and with your last post, i now see Love, Value, and
>Feeling as near-synonyms. mass loves mass--that's gravity. mass
>mass. mass feels good about mass. of course, value, feeling, and love
>are very complex in humanland--after all, we are complex thinking
>carriers must be avoided, so let me deal with them now, if you will.
>interactions, sensations, emotions, and reason all are "things" that
>to me to be intellectual patterns of value. they are all "idea"s,
>a rock has the idea to value another rock (gravity), a human nerve has
>idea to respond to stimuli (sensation), R. Pirsig has the idea of loss
>(sadness) with the death of his son, or a person like me has the idea
>the future will behave like the past (reason).... since your carriers
>intellectual patterns of value, do you still want to use them as a
>set of "things"?

In a previous post, I mentioned Claude Shannon who developed mathematics
for analysing communications, but he only looked at the "information
content" (the carrier) and ignored semantic meaning. Troy states that
MoQ does away with this distinction, but I disagree. We've had many
discussions on patterns, symbols, codes and language, and I'd say that
ALL those things are carriers. Words are carriers of value. The whole
MoQ is an abstract structure represented by carriers of value. If you
want to experience a "non-abstract" MoQ, go out for a walk, don't read a
book about it!
Abstraction is about manipulating carriers - you can't have intellect
without it.

The special problem of Intellect is that the MoQ itself is an ENTIRELY
intellectual construct, yet that MoQ contains Intellect. The whole IDEA
of an IntPoV is itself an IntPoV. That is what makes it a special
category and I've said so before (to the consternation of some squad

Troy is perhaps right to be uneasy about this, because it goes all the
way back to Plato's separation of "horse" from "horseness". You might
call this a binary metaphysics which has matterPoV and mindPoV.

In summary, I would say that any thought system is OBLIGED to use
information carriers.
Troy is surely wrong when he says "carriers are results of platypi".
Platypi are the results of carriers, when the carriers selected prove to
be inappropriate.


homepage -
queries -
unsubscribe - with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:33 BST