Re: MD Chance and natural selection

From: Joe (
Date: Fri Aug 22 2003 - 20:49:40 BST

  • Next message: MATTHEW PAUL KUNDERT: "Re: MD Intersubjective agreement"

    On 20 August 2003 5:55 PM Scott R writes:

    Hi Scott,

    I have not before responded to your posts since I can't follow them. You
    make a lot of strange claims without some backing, and go off from them on
    paths I can't follow. For instance:

    I now have a word to describe the connection of DNA to consciousness. My
    DNA, by definition contains the four orders, inorganic, organic, social, and

     Where did this definition come from? DNA is a chemical.

    joe: i am not looking at the chemical analysis. I am looking at life
    (organic, social, intellect) evolvinging from the inorganic order. DNA is
    the smallest particle I thought of as a term to represent individual life.
    In MoQ these orders are defined as different in a division of everything
    into dyanmic or static quality, and this seems to be an accepted division
    and definition.

    My DNA emanates a field I call awareness.

    Why do you think this? Do all chemicals emanate an awareness field or just
    DNA? If the latter, what makes DNA special?

    joe: in reverse order, IMO DNA is special by being the smallest particle of
    individual life. In order to be known all chemicals emanate to a receiving
    brain. The emanation is latched into a pattern and a word is assigned. DNA
    suggests a different connection to knowledge. One-celled organisms seek
    food. Their activity is modified by something other than gravity. This
    difference shows a capability (purpose) for identifying specific chemicals
    necessary to their state. Other capabilities emanate from the inorganic
    order creating a more complex organic (purpose), social (purpose, emotion),
    intellectual (purpose, emotion, quality) orders. The more complex
    individuals have a presence indicating a more complex field of awareness. A
    DNA generated awareness field is the simplest explanation.

    Why? I am trying to work out the implications of an instinctive sensing of

    "Consciousness or even sentience *cannot* evolve out of non-consciousness."

    joe: that raises the bar pretty high for trying to describe how life
    (conscious) and material (non conscious) are in the same universe. The word
    'evolve' straddles the two universes. Emanation is the vehicle.

    I am sorry for being obscure. Since MoQ is a recent observation, there are
    not a lot of words that have an accepted meaning in describing its effects.


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 22 2003 - 20:59:37 BST