From: Paul Turner (paulj.turner@ntlworld.com)
Date: Wed Oct 22 2003 - 13:22:25 BST
Hi Mark
Mark:
No matter at which point one begins exploring the MoQ, one discovers
that the particular area of enquiry implicates all other aspects of the
MoQ.
I apologise if this is a naive statement. But it occurs to me that the
MoQ is not foundationalist? One may state that Quality is the empirical
grounding of reality, and that may sound foundationalist. But if one
begins to apply the MoQ, as we have done concerning truth for example,
then all other areas align themselves in a coherent unity.
To give an example: We discuss the intervention of DQ in rational
enquiry. This begs the question, 'Who is enquiring?' We move from the
epistemic utility of value to the ontological status of individuals.
Individuals are patterns of evolutionary related levels of SQ in a
continuum - a relationship with DQ.
Paul:
Yes, unlike the vocabulary of substance based metaphysics, the MOQ
provides a vocabulary and a context in which to consider a massive range
of human experience, and this may extend to placing everyday activity
into an evolutionary context. Also, as you say, human experience cannot
be detached completely from Dynamic indeterminacy, and any explanation
that does so is likely to miss something of value.
Mark:
This being so, DQ can never be excluded from rational enquiry?
Paul:
I agree - Dynamic Quality, as synonymous with experience, pervades all
static patterns. If I elaborate on the last email, my statement may be
clearer.
A study of documented rational enquiry throughout history lends itself
to the interpretation that structures of thought are getting better at
explaining and predicting experience. In an MOQ framework, this is
described as the evolution of intellectual patterns. In terms of
evolution, if we state that all activity is, in broad terms, directed
towards greater stability [towards static patterns] or towards greater
versatility [towards Dynamic Quality], then rational enquiry may be
directed towards strengthening existing structures or towards new and
better structures.
If we further consider the characteristics of each aspect of the
evolutionary process, a shift towards greater stability requires a
particular spirit and method - e.g. intellectual discipline, adherence
to logic, clarity of terms, gaining of social approval - and this indeed
has a static quality of its own. Dynamic advances, on the other hand,
require more of an artistic spirit to follow "dim apprehensions," a kind
of value-looseness. It seems to me that both characteristics are needed
to evolve intellectual patterns and as such I think rational enquiry,
like anything else, operates in this ratchet-like manner. In short,
whilst I consider all experience to be a continual emergence of static
patterns from ongoing Dynamic Quality [and so it is never excluded]; I
think it is useful to distinguish between the static and Dynamic aspects
of evolution.
It is in this respect that I stated "not all rational enquiry is a
response to Dynamic Quality."
Cheers
Paul
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 : Wed Oct 22 2003 - 13:26:04 BST