From: sriram25@comcast.net
Date: Fri Nov 01 2002 - 04:43:37 GMT
Hello Sam,
This is an excellent summary of the principles of the moq. There doesn't
seem to be anything more to add that could make it better while retaining
the brevity. The part on the celebrity principle was especially good. The
concluding part about the big political question for the 21st century is
also interesting. Thanks for a well-articulated 'standard account.'
Regards,
-- Sriram
----- Original Message -----
From: "Elizaphanian" <Elizaphanian@members.v21.co.uk>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: MD Sophocles not Socrates
> Hi there,
>
> Me again.
>
> I would like to set out how I understand the 'standard account' of the
MoQ,
> and invite comments on it, before I then go on to a (last?) articulation
of
> my concerns. Any and all comments welcome.
>
> ~~~~~
> The Metaphysics of Quality (MoQ) is an intellectual ordering of
experience;
> it is a way of organising our knowledge; it is a filing system for the
> contents of our mind.
>
> It postulates that the fundamental reality is Quality or value. All things
> come from Quality, and it is Quality that draws all things into being from
> Quality. All that exists is a form of Quality, and nothing exists without
> Quality.
>
> The first distinction that is made in understanding Quality is a
distinction
> between Dynamic Quality (DQ) and Static Quality (SQ). DQ cannot be named
and
> cannot be described. It is the cutting edge of experience. It is
> pre-intellectual awareness. DQ does not fit into any intellectual system;
it
> is the ragged edge at the border of all such systems. DQ is the driving
> force of evolution, the lure which all of existence pursues.
>
> Sometimes, a DQ driven evolution constitutes an evolutionary leap.
Something
> new comes into existence. For this new thing of value to be maintained in
> existence it must 'static latch'; that is, it must be able to generate a
> particular pattern of value which persists over time, either on a
continuous
> basis or a continuously regenerated basis.
>
> These static latches form the known world. They are the stable forms of
> Quality.
>
> Static Quality can be named. It can be classified and analysed. The
> principal classification of SQ is a division into four levels. These
levels
> are discrete and do not overlap. Moreover, all that we presently know can
be
> classified and described according to these four levels, except for DQ
> itself, which, to repeat, remains outside of all realms of classification.
>
> The four levels are: inorganic, organic, social and intellectual. (For the
> sake of simplicity the inorganic can be taken to include the quantum
level,
> although perhaps this level could constitute its own 'zeroth' level).
>
> The inorganic level refers to atomic and molecular behaviour. Any object
can
> be viewed as existing at the inorganic level. For example, a rock is a
> pattern of inorganic value - it's constituents parts value their current
> relationships more than any other alternative (eg disintegration). In the
> original flux, before there was either matter or time, Quality was found
to
> lie in a certain structuring of quantum forces. [Here an astro-physicist
can
> fill in the gaps].
>
> The inorganic level is shaped by the laws of physics. These laws are
simply
> a codification of the value choices made by atoms and molecules.
>
> The organic (or biological) began to develop when a particular molecule
made
> a DQ leap into a different pattern of behaviour. 'Biological evolution can
> be seen as a process by which weak Dynamic forces at a subatomic level
> discover stratagems for overcoming huge static inorganic forces at a
> superatomic level.' The highest quality static latch at the organic level
> was the molecule DNA. In practical terms this level can be considered as
> anything which can be described with reference to DNA.
>
> The organic level is shaped by the law of natural selection. This law is a
> codification of the value choices made by organic patterns of value.
>
> Uniquely (so far as we know), the human species is able to experience two
> further degrees of static quality.
>
> The social level is the 'subjective customs of groups of people'. This
sense
> of 'social' does not apply to anything non-human. The DQ innovation and
> static latch which enabled the social level to come into being was the
> development of language. It is possible that this static latch was
> supplemented by the further DQ innovation and static latch of ritual, but
> that is a moot point.
>
> The social level encompasses an enormous variety of human behaviour. It
can
> be understood through the values which govern it. The social level is
shaped
> by moral laws (eg against murder, adultery, theft) which are enforced by
> policemen and priests. These laws are what preserve the existence of
social
> patterns of value from a degradation into the biological patterns of value
> on which the society depends. The social level is also ordered through the
> celebrity principle, which articulates the governing social values.
> Celebrities are those people who exemplify the values of the society, and
> who gain social rewards (principally wealth, power and fame) as a result.
> Social laws are a codification of the value choices made by societies.
>
> The intellectual level is the level of symbolic social learning, the same
as
> mind. It is the collection and manipulation of symbols, created in the
> brain, that stand for patterns of experience. The DQ innovation and static
> latch which enabled the intellectual level to come into being has not been
> satisfactorily determined.
>
> The intellectual level is shaped by the notion of 'truth', which stands
> independently of social opinion. There is no link between celebrity and
> truth. The guardians of the intellectual level are, variously, the members
> of the Church of Reason. Intellectual 'laws' (eg logic) are a codification
> of the value choices made by intellectuals.
>
> A culture is a combination of social and intellectual patterns of value.
The
> twentieth century can be seen as a struggle between social patterns of
value
> with differing degrees of intellectual control. For the first time there
are
> now societies where intellectual patterns of value are able to flourish.
The
> big political question is whether the social patterns which sustain that
> flourishing can also maintain themselves against the biological patterns
> which threaten to devour them. That will probably be the struggle of the
> twenty first century.
>
> ~~~~~~
>
>
> Sam
> www.elizaphanian.v-2-1.net/home.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> 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 Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:33:33 GMT