[MD] What Bo Doesn't Get

[Steven Peterson]

Hi Dan,

On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 12:01 AM, Dan Glover <daneglover at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Krimel <Krimel at krimel.com> wrote:
>> [Steve]
>> The intellectual level of evolution is the collection of all intellectual
>> patterns of value.
>>
>> [Krimel]
>> Exactly!
>
> Dan:
> Not exactly. Evolution isn't a level, is it? Evolution is what drives
> the levels. Evolutionary history is what the levels have in common.
>
> Now, what Steve might mean is, the evolution of the intellectual level
> is a collection of all intellectual patterns of value. But doesn't
> that go without saying?

Steve:

I'm not saying that evolution is a level. The phrase "intellectual
level of evolution" is nothing meant to be controversial. The
intellectual level, like all the static levels, is a level in an
evolutionary hierarchy of value patterns. That's all I meant.

I agree that saying that the intellectual level is the collection of
all intellectual patterns of values should go without saying. It is a
shame that it doesn't when it comes to Bo. The intellectual level for
him is "the value of the subject/object aggregate." He sees each level
as a single value rather than a collection of value patterns of a
given type, but I am sure you are already aware of his take on the
MOQ.

Best,
Steve