RE: MD novel/computer heirarchy

From: Mati Palm-Leis (mpalm@merr.com)
Date: Thu Jul 17 2003 - 03:45:59 BST

  • Next message: Scott R: "Re: MD Intellectual patterns? huh?"

    Johnny and all you folks,

    I will take a crack at it, but remember I am a rooky at this stuff.

    Johnny: 1. Doesn't the MoQ say that the 4th level patterns exist on top
    of 3rd levelpatterns the way a novel sits on top of a computer? The
    intellectual level doesn't sit on top of 2nd level patterns (people).
    They don't come out of individuals, they come out of society and are
    about society. They help a society find food, not an individual find
    food. An individual uses biological patterns of intellegence and
    repeats social patterns to find food. Is this wrong? Please address
    the novel/computer metaphor as it relates to the 3rd and 4th levels. I
    think it clarifies the difference between thinking in a biological sense
    and thinking in an intellectual sense.

    2. Instead of saying that all the patterns exist as intellectual
    patterns of
    different levels, isn't it better to use the word consciousness or
    awareness
    rather than intellect, thus avoiding having to use the confusing phrase
    "intuitive intellect" to distinguish consciousness from enduring ideas,
    and
    saving the term intellect to use for thoughts about society, thoughts
    only
    possible after the establishment of the third level?

    Mati: I have following the discussion on "Intellectual Level" with
    interest. For myself I have come to believe that the "Intellectual
    Level" is one's capacity to reason and rationalize the realities they
    experience. As far as a novel is concerned it is a work of reason and
    rationalizations, whether it covers inorganic, biological, social or
    rationalizations themselves. This is perhaps why the Nazis loved their
    book burnings, the possible intellectual (reason/rationalization)
    threaten the social reality the Nazi tried to promote. This brings me
    to my rub as "Thinking" as intellect. We do, I believe think in other
    patterns without necessarily reasoning. IE. I go out to dinner and I
    see an attractive woman, my biological thinking and my interest is
    perked (Biological Thinking). I quickly suppress my interest to not
    offend my wife. (Social Thinking). After all this thinking I am hungry
    and order from the menu (Back to Biological Thinking). I reflect and
    reason/rationalize on this all and try to understand this entire
    experience and it's meaning, and perhaps write a novel(Intellectual
    Level).
             I reflect on Pirsig's quote: "One answer is to fudge both mind
    and matter and the whole question that goes with them into another
    platypus called "Man." "Man" has a body (and therefore is not himself a
    body) and he also has a mind (and therefore not himself a mind). But if
    one asks what is this "Man" (which is not of body or mind) one doesn't
    come up with anything. There isn't any "man" independent of the
    patterns. Man is the patterns.
    (Lila, pg. 177-178)
            I see MOQ delineating these patterns to explain and for that
    matter reason or rationalize, the wide array of reality patterns we
    experience.
            As far as using "consciousness or awareness rather than
    intellect" I am concerned that "consciousness" does not have the
    capacity to support our ability to reason values or quality.

    Take care,
    Mati

    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 Jul 17 2003 - 03:47:56 BST