Hello everybody,
I will now have another try with my Elvaleaches-concept(ELements VALuing EACH).
After I sensed an overwhelming interest on this concept - Bobby seemed to be
extremely fascinated if not even fanatic about it ;-) - I will now try to give
you a more coherent description of what I have collected in the meantime.
Well not exactly coherent, but in a sort of 'questions-and-answers'-style. I
hope that by this, I can bring more of you to have at least a quick glance to
this idea. (Remember 'True-Fiction' of David Buchananon June 4th, 2000 ?)
PAQ - Presumably Asked Questions
Q: So, young man, you really think you have found all on a sudden something that
has not been discovered in years of intensive discussing Robert M. Pirsigs
Books, you are joking aren't you?
A: Actually not really, no! What I developed, since I defined 'system' is not
really new, I know, but I do not intend to contradict anything having been said
in the past. I even did not intend to 'find' such a concept, neither to draw any
conclusions. This idea 'jumped' at me during one of my walks.
Q: What does Elvaleach exactly mean then? Are we really in need of one more new
'word'?
A: Elvaleaches stands for ELements VALuing EACH and it describes any 'system'
you can think of. It can be 'totality' as well as the basical elvaleach. The
basical elvaleach defines the smallest 'system' you can think of. It expresses,
that there are needed, at least two elements with an 'intervaluation' of more
than zero.
Q:Totality, another new word; but it is not really new, isn't it?
A: Well, that's right. 'Totality' has been used by some mystical and also
idealistic thinkers.
The last one to use it, was Fritjof Capra, who wrote 'turning point' in '82.
Perhaps you have heard of him before!
Q:Certainly, I did. Hmm...Elvaleaches, Totality, ...well, but do you believe
seriously it is possible to explain, say a 'quark' by means of the same
definition as well as for the whole universe and everything in between? Sounds a
bit megalomaniac, don't you think?
A: Yes, it does indeed! But this depends always on how simple you make a
definition. I mean, I can describe everything that is, by saying: 'A lot of
patterns exist' and it also includes the whole universe, down from the
'Higgs-Boson up to the universe and even parallel universes that we do not know
of yet. But am I right to say, that this is also, what Pirsigs books are all
about, somehow? Otherwise, I must admit, that applying my concept on everything
describable (i.e. only some chosen examples) is far from really functioning.
Q:As far as I see it is only another word for 'pattern' as Pirsig is using it,
isn't it? And what I see furthermore, is that your elvaleaches, truely speaking,
looks much more confusing than 'pattern' itself! So only a new word for an old
concept?
A: You are partially right, ok, but as we have seen in the past, there is always
much confusion when talking about the 'intellectual level', because we have
problems to clearly distinguish (I have sometimes!) between the THING on the one
hand and the 'intellectual pattern' of the thing on the other hand. The only
thing I do is, calling 'THING' elvaleach and calling the copy, I mean what we
have stored in our mind about this 'thing', as we did all the time, a 'pattern'.
Q: Not quite so much confusing for ME to distinguish, young man, but ok! Seems
to be a most practical idea at least. Now I would like you to explain once more
your concept and also 'intervaluation'. What does it mean then?
A:Oh yes it sounds boring, this definition, I know, but firsteval it is
necessary to find an abstraction that works for as many things as possible and
second I tried to bring in Pirsigs 'value-concept' into it, of which I do not
yet know, whether it has been successful or not.
Once again the definition:
A 'system' is defined essentially by an existence of a zone in the
multidimensional web of Intervaluations and which is surrounded by a
boundary-zone. This boundary-zone consists of a decrease/a drop of those
intervaluations.
'Intervaluations' describes a relation between two elements - not necessarily
substance :-) - that value each other. This value expresses a preference like it
has been created by Pirsig.
A 'non-system' is a zone that is lacking of such a discontinuity of
intervaluations.
Therefore, I concluded, but this is even more weird, that an (inner) zone, where
there is LESS intervaluation compared to the surroundings, should be also a
system (f.e. black hole??). But this with a big interrogation mark!
Q: One more question before I have to leave (We may pick it up later, perhaps).:
What the hell is all this good for? And what about 'quality' and the 'levels', I
mean we are talking about ZAMM and LILA, do we? Is there 'quality' in there?
A: Ähemmm..., I do not yet know, if this is good for anything at all. But the
search for 'quality' I guess had been driving me forward. At least I can see
'dynamic quality'! Dynamic quality is the force, that drives forward this
development of the web of these elvaleaches, through time and space and mind,
all those uncounted small and big elvaleaches to achieve more and more. And
their way to achieve more, to reach a higher 'level' is the invention of new
dimensions again and again. Dimensions, I consider to be a sort of
'Micro-Levels' that represents a new step, a new quality. What happens between
two levels, apart from an additional dimension at least, is still more or less
vague to me.
Let me just add that, in my opinion, a human being inheres all the levels and
dimensions that has been passed since the very beginnings. Furthermore I don't
see any reason, why there should be no further level (or dimension); upwards
there is no limit (apart from a limitation of space and energy concerning the
earth)
And for example in moments of extreme destabilisation a human being tends to
show very uncommon patterns of behaviour.
I thank you for your patience so far,
I wish you well,
So long JoVo
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:50 BST