Re: MD Individuals and Collectives

From: khaled Alkotob (khaledsa@juno.com)
Date: Thu Sep 08 2005 - 19:24:34 BST

  • Next message: mark maxwell: "RE: MD The SOL fallacy (or Blind mans buff)"

    Arlo

    Using logic to explain reason to Platt is useless, he/she will always
    throw rhetoric back at you. That stems from fear of becoming a
    progressive thinker.

    You can't explain calculus to someone barely passing algebra.

    The world is changing faster and faster. Conservative thinking can't cope
    with it.

    Rhetoric is their answer. And they will always paint themselves in a
    corner, and when the push comes to shove, rewrite history.

    Khaled

    On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 12:59:07 -0400 Arlo Bensinger <ajb102@psu.edu>
    writes:
    > All,
    >
    > Platt and I have been discussing the "individual" and the "collective"
    on
    > this thread. I'm renaming it to see if anyone else wants to jump in.
    >
    > [Platt]
    > >I emphasize the primary, the individual, you the secondary, the
    > collective.So be it.
    >
    > [Arlo]
    > What I try to do is emphasize that value does not reside in either the
    individual OR the collective. But, rather, that the value of the
    > individual increases exponentially in the collective. The value of the

    > "individual",
    > as I am arguing, is not lost in some collective stew. The value of
    that
    > proton is suddenly a hell of lot greater when it forms "water",
    > something that higher level patterns (biological) depend on for their
    > continuance.
    >The cells in your body become more valuable when they form a "Platt"
    > than they ever would be if they didn't. Your "biological" body become
    > significantly more valuable when it becomes part of social level
    patterns.
    > And your socially-formed "I" becomes more valuable when it contributes
    to
    > the evolving collective Intellect. At each level, "individuals" emerge
    from
    > collectives of individuals on the previous layer. These
    > "individuals" have greater value than the "individuals" on the
    previous layer.
    >
    > At the Intellectual level, I suppose, I'd argue that an "individual"
    > would be "math" or "chaos theory" or "MOQ". Each of these
    "individuals" is
    > formed by the collectivization of "individuals" on the social level,
    which
    > are in turn formed by the collectivization of "individuals" on the
    > biological level, which are in turn formed by the collectivization of
    > "individuals" on the inorganic level.
    >

    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 : Thu Sep 08 2005 - 19:31:24 BST