Hi Joćo,
you wrote:
>Art explores the conceptually unknown creating patterns that make the
>conceptually unknown intelligible (?)
>Science covers measurable (intelligible) patterns that arise from the
>conceptually unknown trying to incorporate them in the conceptually known
>through the creation of new static patterns (?) concepts (?)
These are good working definitions of Art and Science.
The problem is whether Scientists would accept this. As you might have
heard, a scientist called Dr John C Lilly, was commissioned to experiment
on the effects of LSD, and as a result of his experiments, called upon
the scientific community to explore the "Science of the Unknown" as a
vast field where scientists had yet to seriously venture. Unfortunately
he was descredited with rumours that his brain had become demented as a
result of LSD, so he thereafter confined himself into dolphin research.
His book "Programming and Metaprogramming in the Human Biocomputer", is
available for download on the net where he laments that respect for the
Unknown is hard to come by, and that there is a bias against any such
inquiries where there is no "hard evidence" to support any hypotheses.
>yet, I think science should contact with the conceptually unknown.
Yes, but it is a big "should". Fact is, nobody supports this kind of
research where the problems or hypotheses themselves are not clearly
defined. Dr Lilly did put up the scientific problem as follows:
"Given a certain consciousness, can we satisfactorily account for
all the inputs and outputs to and from this consciousness , ie,
can we truly isolate and confine it."
>Do you think that we can include science and art in the diagram?
In that case Art should occupy the position closest to DQ followed
by intellect and then Science.
>assumptions: pattern of value = concept
static quality = conceptually known
dynamic quality = conceptually unknown
... what do you think?
>How can we measure the quality (static) of an organization of value
>patterns?
I think by the efficiency and stability this organisation of value
patterns manages its support resources and stll remain dynamic. By
its ability to anticipate and foresee potential faultlines in its
value patterns before they reach a "runaway" or out of control
stage.
>to continue, I would need to know the goal of an organization of value
>patterns, but that's not very clear right now..
We are basically in the realm of life, where individual goals are as
important as the goal of an organisation of value patterns, so the
organisation as such cannot have rigid goals except the maximisation
of individual freedom but within the parameters of eqitable and
efficient resource utilisation and the prevention of abuse of these
resources, so that the freedoms of others is not threatened. Thus
it boils down to optimization of available resources in support of
diversity of life forms.
>Is any of this "of quality"?
>Cheers,
Joćo
Yeah, sure is.
Cheers.
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:30 BST