From: Matthew Poot (mattpoot@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun Apr 18 2004 - 21:50:32 BST
Hello Joe,
I think you're onto something ;-)
MAtt
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe <jhmau@sbcglobal.net>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: MD The Individual Level
> On 14 April 2004 6:10 AM Mark writes in essay to Sam:
>
> Mark:
> So, when Sam glibly trots out, "it is the wise person that is most free
and
> in touch with Quality, not the intellectual" what is he saying?
> Well, even by Aristotle's lights, both his wise men, the man of affairs
and
> the philosopher use intellect to do what they do. But here we have to
bring
> in Aristotle's notion of potential and actuality. Both men actuate their
> potential intellects, but the man of affairs integrates his to living a
full
> man of affairs life, to the neglect of specialisation, (jack of all
trades,
> master of none)! while the philosopher fully actuates his intellect! Which
> one is better? That is a debate that is going on and on. But the thing
is,
> the MoQ and my, The edge of chaos would agree with Sam and suggest that
> Coherence is best. The problem is, Sam says the essence of autonomy is the
> individual, whereas i would say it is Coherence of patterns in and across
> levels. It is the intellectual patterns in tension with all other patterns
> which generates Dynamic coherence which is then attributed to the
> individual, and NOT the individual as a 'level' of the MoQ. The
difference
> is subtle, but absolutely important: Sam does not understand that what he
is
> saying is not a minor change to the MoQ, his changes are founded on a
> complete misunderstanding of what the MoQ is saying.
>
> Hi Mark, Sam, and all:
>
> joe: i am excited about your description of an individual. I reread TEOC.
> I mused that maybe everything is a vibration. Sound is known in note
> relations (the octave). I wonder if note relations apply in other
mediums?
> If there are other mediums? Is harmony a way to see coherence?
>
> I quote from you, Mark, I hope it is alright:
> "Complexity theory is one of the most controversial areas of current
> scientific research. Developing out of chaos theory, complexity suggests
> that there are hidden tendencies in nature to select ordered states, even
> when statistically they are vastly outnumbered by chaotic possibilities:
> that there is a deep natural impulse towards order, counteracting the
> degenerative tendencies of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Like chaos,
> complexity is a multidisciplinary area of research and those involved
> include physicists, economists and biologists. This is a study of
> complexity.
> Sweet spots may indicate that Quality is not merely a human invention.
Sweet
> spots are to be found everywhere and provide supporting evidence for the
> cosmological evolution postulated in the MOQ. Examples of sweet spots in
> nature may be readily seen in the phenomena of phase transitions. These
> appear to be sweet spots where the freedom of possibility merges with the
> security of the actual:
> The deep natural impulse towards order' that complexity indicates may be
> better restated as a balance between SQ patterns. The impulse is DQ and
the
> order is SQ." The Edge of Chaos by Mark Maxwell p 5.
>
> joe: IMO there is something about self-awareness that is elusive. Can I
> conclude that each level has tendencies which would look like awareness to
> another level? Is self awareness, the awareness of one level experiencing
> the changes in another level?
>
> An individual sentient is four levels. I have a layered self-awareness.
I
> experience the awareness of action, if I am not asleep. Morality in a
> sentient individual seems to require an awareness in each level. An
> awareness united across different levels seems to be able to be
> indiscriminate. Something blocks discrete awareness in immoral actions.
> Patterns between different levels can find an immoral coherence. Perhaps
I
> am getting lost trying to picture it. Get the coherence right between dq
> sq, before picturing coherence between sq sq on different levels.
>
> Mark:
> "patterns in tension with other patterns which generates Dynamic coherence
> which is then attributed to an individual, and NOT the individual as a
> 'level' of the MOQ"
>
> joe: IMO the awareness of an individual can be more or less. When I
> experience 'beauty' something changes my awareness. My awareness of the
> cohesion is striking. When I create 'beauty' it seems something has
changed
> in me which expands beyond me. I accept something mechanically as a
member
> of an audience at a concert. I sing my own song and the coherence of
> patterns finds a different place in me. Is there a difference between
> accepted and created awareness. Is the accepted awareness of
> Jack-of-all-trades, the same as the created awareness of the philosopher?
> IMO the philosopher is more moral than the jack-of-all-trades.
>
> Why do I experience patterns in coherence as having a life of its own? Is
> this a mystical experience? I anthropomorphize DQ and the levels are not
> useful. DQ is not God. I can't anthropomorphize 'evolution'. IMO The
> evolving sentient is one that is more in touch with the awareness of the
> different levels?
>
> Joe
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
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 : Sun Apr 18 2004 - 22:01:43 BST