From: mark maxwell (laughingpines@yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Fri Nov 25 2005 - 22:46:23 GMT
Mike:
Autonomous individuals question received dogmas and
are therefore
"capable of establishing their own laws by which to
act (auto nomos)", as Sam puts it in his exposition of
the Eudaimonic MOQ.
Mark:
Hi Mike, I'm not interested in Sam's ideas.
Sam Norton is something of a religious nut case who
doesn't want the MOQ to be accepted as it stands. Sam
does want a philosophy that describes an intellectual
level challenging the authority divinity.
You're not a religious at all are you Mike?
Although Sam argues for self determination, self
determination in his view either saves your soul or it
does not. God said that and Sam agrees with scripture
as revelation.
I asked Sam the straight question: "Are you trying to
save your soul"? and he answered that he was trying to
save his soul.
As an intellectual, i'm not going to accept that crap.
Mike:
Your counterexample of a King is an interesting one.
Kings make laws, true, but these laws are designed to
uphold religious dogma or to maintain the integrity of
society (which are the King's _social functions), or -
if he is a tyrant - to advance his own interests.
Mark:
Kings do what the bloody hell they like Mike. Henry
VIII changed the religion of his country more than
once on a whim and killed wives if they looked at him
the wrong way. He also had a bloke who's sole purpose
was to wipe his arse hole.
Very often, secret meetings where held in the room
where Henry had his ring pampered and to this day the
meetings are still called the 'privy council'.
Mike:
This isn't what I mean by autonomy...
Mark:
I know it isn't. I've known from the start that you
are using the term in more than one way and jump from
one to the other indiscriminately.
In order to resolve your confusion i presented you
with a metaphysical basis for the term 'autonomy'
using MOQ terminology. Because this is a metaphysical
description it is the most basic and may therefore be
applied to describe all cases of autonomy. (See: 4th
level The more Autonomous level)
Mike:
I have to admit it's pretty hard to explain exactly
what I do mean, but it has a lot to do with the
"Witness" as described in today's "Emotions and
subjectivity" post.
Mark:
Well, as soon as Ken Wilber enters the fray things
become a real mess.
Mike:
While I agree that mythos shapes logos, I still
believe that we can define the criteria that
distinguish logos from mythos. More on this soon, I
hope.
Mark:
There is going to be more? Jesus.
Mike:
I must confess a lack of understanding here. How is
predication
related to the S/O divide?
Mark:
Language is a social pattern, so if social patterns
display S/O divisions, S/O division can't be the basis
of Skutvik's intellect. That's for Skutvik's benefit
more than yours Mike.
Mark
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
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 Nov 25 2005 - 22:52:31 GMT