From: phyllis bergiel (neilfl@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Mon Apr 28 2003 - 17:11:17 BST
> Hi Paul,
>
> Speaking for myself, I am not only not irritated, but I am very interested
in your take on this
> thread, and I think you are onto something. Moreover, I think your last
post is a model of clarity;
> I wish there were more such. > >
> Sam
>
> Definitely agree with Sam!
This whole discussion reminds me of mind, body, self, soul discussions.
There seems to be a "sum is more than its parts" going on. That's the
point about cohesion I think. The brain may be just a static biological
pattern, but when it encounters other patterns such as "government" or
"calculus" it can do so much more than a mere static pattern labeled "human
organ" ever could.
My definition points right now in a direction of autonomy. Individual
autonomy seems to me to be a prerequisite for experiencing and subsequently
valuing a DQ event. If IA is not operative, then the DQ event is feared and
rejected. Think "savage meets flashlight," or "city slicker in forest at
night" as examples. If IA is operative, the DQ event is further analyzed to
see if it should be at least temporarily latched.
Question here though, does it then become a static intellectual pattern
accumulated to the group of SPOQs called Lila or Sam or Phyllis or Paul?
Phyllis
>
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 : Mon Apr 28 2003 - 17:06:34 BST