Re: MD Bolstering Bo's SOL

From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Fri Jun 03 2005 - 21:41:14 BST

  • Next message: Allenbarrows9966@aol.com: "Re: MD Bolstering Bo's SOL"

    Dear Bo,

    Good to read from you again! Hope to see more visits by you.

    You
    Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 6:26 PM

    > Wim said to Platt's:
    > > > I think Bo's point is that subject-object thinking dominates the
    > > > intellectual level and thus defines it.
    >
    > First this. I don't say that SOM dominates the intellectual level, I
    > say that it IS intellect. All of it, every last bit!
    >
    > > Do YOU consider that a proper way of defining something? Is life defined
    > > by bacteria that dominate bio-mass??
    >
    > You are addressing Platt not me. My claim (in this context) would
    > be that life is the biological level.

    Platt apparently misunderstood your point. I was indeed addressing Platt
    interpretation of your point, not you.

    I understand your point as: the 4th level of the MoQ is identical with
    subject-object thinking, or rather: with the value of that type of thinking.

    I mentioned to Platt in my 1 Jun 6:21 +0200 posting four types of
    thinking/consciousness:
    > subject-subject thinking (primitive consciousness) and subject-object
    > thinking (modern consciousness). To be added (we hope) of course: Quality
    > consciousness... Another elements of the intellectual level may be
    spiritual
    > and/or aesthetic consciousness.
    I agree that 'consciousness' is too ambiguous. It doesn't sound right to
    write 'spiritual thinking' and 'aesthetic thinking', however. Do you have an
    alternative term to connect with spirituality and aesthetics?

    You probably agree that there is no higher level yet and that apart from
    those 4 levels there's only Dynamic Quality (the value of changing in the
    right direction).
    Do the value of primitive, subject-subject thinking (us<>them, describing
    'things' as spirited), the value of spirituality and the value of aesthetics
    belong to the 3rd level in your opinion or are they pure Dynamic Quality?
    What then defines the 3rd level according to you?

    With friendly greetings,

    Wim

    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 : Fri Jun 03 2005 - 21:39:29 BST