From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Wed Oct 22 2003 - 20:15:06 BST
In a message dated 10/22/03 1:38:13 PM GMT Daylight Time,
paulj.turner@ntlworld.com writes:
> 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
>
Thanks Paul,
I did not wish to be nit picky? Maybe i look too hard for DQ these days - it
can become rather addictive!
All the best,
Mark
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 - 20:35:42 BST