Bo & Foci,
Bo has responded to my first post with the following replies:
<<the biological image of big cities as super-bodies consisting of humans as
"cells" with super-MINDS (in the SOM body/mind sense) is wrong.>>
<< In my opinion it equates it with SOM's "ghost in the machine" mind. Look.
MOQ's "Intellectual Level" is a static pattern of existence, no mental
superstructure upon biology - the latter forces us to construct a
biological image of cities.>>
<< the same tendency, now is to construct a biological image of the inorganic
level! Enough complex circuits and voila! MIND! Machines compute and
calculate, but in a MOQ universe the intellectual level isn't thinking but
perception of that particular static quality>>
<< Pirsig's rhetoric is that it is foolish to think that cities could arise
from dead matter. Good! Then why all this talk about superorganic giants?
Unless as a pretext for imposing a supermind on to it? They are social
patterns and that's
a level above biology. >>
<< Our biological self IS the biological processes and does "want" them to
proceed at the correct rate. However our social self constantly "wants"
biology to behave differently: Not burp at the table (grin), but rather stay
young, pretty
handsome and slim! >>
<<Our intellectual self (our social self's natural born enemy) in turn
"wants" our social self to stop interfering. It does so by denying/neglecting
social value, insisting upon itself as "consciousness" directly out of the
body. Socially-induced abuse of the body like anorexia, beauty surgery,
circumcisions etc remain mysteries that the intellect can find no REASON
for.>>
Dear Mr. Bo,
I fully agree with all of your replies. I have followed your SOLAQI idea
since I have been a member of this focus group. You are on solid ground with
your S/O-logic. Your doctrine is perhaps the truest to the 'whole' MOQ
manifesto. I think you have helped clarify the levels to many and should
probably be considered a top MOQ disciple. (Lets not make you a martyr just
yet ; ) My problem is that you are always ready to " find another pretext to
zoom in on your pet theory: "the mind fallacy." You are just a little to
indoctrinated for my style. Not that that is bad, its just, well …."Static".
(Not every month is for ringing the SOLAQI bell)
I was hoping that my comments would be understood by the way that I stated I
was making an "assumption" for obscure and playful discussion. While still
being serious enough for constructive dialogue. I am speculating in an
imaginative way for this month. I invite you all to let your imagination join
with your logic and causation theories into Dynamic flow.
Bo also said:
<<BTW, humans as biology DID crawl out of the periodic table of elements,
didn't it?>>
Yes, and that was my point! That is my premise for making my
assumption/speculation that Cities are "living". I totally understand that
this is not correct in the MOQ view. What I offer is a speculation, just
enough to temporally shift our view in order for a pragmatic dissection of
the change. It should be fun.
(If we keep the discussion to a pure and true MOQ view, then my question
becomes this: "What *actually* happens [or happened] between the inorganic
and the biological level?)
Now (within my assumption) for the fun speculation
<<Does the Giant have a Devouring nature?>>
I find myself thinking of a PBS special program about the construction of
the Hoover Dam. How ruthlessly and oppressively it killed hundreds of lives
to build such a structure. "Like clotting blood cells, we plugged up that
great river like a scab. And for what purpose? To bring life to the desert?
Or do those powerful turbines turn water pressure into electricity just to
light up the needless blinking lights and neon signs, of fake flamingos,
pyramids, lions, castles, ships, guitars and palaces that make up Las Vegas
in order to dazzle and dull the senses of additional human energy for Its own
support. Occasionally throwing a bone to one of its members. "Life of the
Desert? Or Death in the desert?"
Would a city have to have a greater devouring nature based on geography?
Gotta Go, But I'll be back.
Peace, Todd
Bo,
I must admit that I also seem to stroke my pet theory in most of my posts. I
just usually don't have as much time to converse in this forum as yourself.
If you haven't noticed my pet theory is that: "The creative force is
Opposition!"
My idea is not as crystallized as SOLAQI yet. When or if that happens, I
probably will also be so excited about it as to never shut up about it
either.
"Its all Good!"
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:21 BST