Hi Sam,
Yes I agree that each emergent level shares a common property of its
component parts (lower level patterns) finding ways to cooperate and mutually
reinforce each other. Much of the dynamic advance within each level can
similarly be explained as finding solutions to cooperate and reinforce each
other in better and better ways. I have used the game theory term "win/win"
many times to describe this feature.I could go on for hours with examples at
all 4 levels, from quantum physics to the scientific method. BTW you can also
apply the win/win term between levels, meaning that higher quality solutions
often both help the upper level and can reinforce that below (something the
MOQ doesn't stress much, but doesn't deny either).
There is one major missing in the win/win mutual reinforcement model --
namely DQ. A perfectly reinforced model is a stable model. But as we know,
models need to be dynamic for the highest quality; they must have a
characteristic that continuously searches for, explores, or creates higher
quality. The inorganic level is propelled by the momemtum of gravity, the
biological by synergy and evolution, the social by cooperative competition,
and the same for the intellectual. With that as an introduction to Rogers
interpretation of the MOQ (for Magnus) let me address Sam's point:
SAM;
Now, many will disagree with that, but if this is right, then it puts some
of our present geo-political arguments in a broader MoQ based context. Let
me focus this into a single question: is the government of the USA morally
justified in refusing to accept the establishment of an international court?
If the existence of an enforced social code is the basis for the
establishment of an entire MoQ level, could not an enforceable international
law also function as the basis for a radically improved international
environment?
ROG:
I would argue that the US is a primary advocate of international cooperation.
Major factions within it support globalization, free trade, the IMF, the
worldbank, The UN, etc etc. (some factions disagree with each too)
You are correct that effective win/win rules between nations on these and
other areas can lead to the elimination or suppression of destructive
win/lose struggles between nations. The question though is whether the
solution is indeed an effective one. Ineffective forms of organization can
lead to lower quality, not higher (the Soviet satellites are great examples).
So, I would say it would be correct to say that developing effective forms
of international law is a good thing in the MOQ. It does not follow though
that the UN, IMF, globalization, Kyoto, international court is necessarily a
good idea though. How can we tell? Through logic, time and experimentation,
imo.
SAM:
And, as the much more contentious corollary to this - if it would be right,
and a high quality innovation, to have an enforceable international court of
justice (for trying war criminals etc) - isn't the US government's refusal
to support its establishment simply the equivalent of the dominant ape's
resistance to the establishment of a social code? So that the government of
the USA is acting on the basis of (the international equivalent of)
biological quality, and the other apes/nations will actually need to come
together to make sure that the big ape doesn't prevent the establishment of
such a highly DQ innovation?
ROG:
I think your analogy could be true if US showed consistant dominant ape
tendencies of refusing to support broader social codes. I think an effective
argument could be made that never in the history of the world has a dominant
ape tried so hard not to bully its neighbors. Perfect...hell no. But better
than past examples...definitely.
In answer then, the solution isn't just to organize, it is to organize
effectively so that quality patterns form that are also dynamic in nature.
The second part is critical. The US -- as is true with any complex
organization -- is not perfect, but it is the antithesis of the problem as
you describe.
Roger
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:38 BST