[MD] Intellectual and Social

[ARLO J BENSINGER JR]

[John]
Hey Arlo, I understand smug superiority when I encounter it.

[Arlo]
Smug superiority? For pointing out for the umpeenth bajillion time the
willfully ignorant mischaracterization of "emergence"?? You know, there has
been so much done in this field, and it touches chaos and quantum physics and,
on top of that, is a varied and rich field of thought. And yet the
anti-intellectual lapdog repeats "oops" over and over again, a Wurlizter
drumbeat of idiocy. And, as Krimel pointed out, if he (or anyone) was even
halfway interested in actually *learning* something about the theory they beat
on, the information is so readily available. But, John, if pointing out willful
ignorance is "smug superiority", then enjoy your time with the willfully
ignorant. 

[John]
My ignorance is freely chosen.

[Arlo]
If you are admittedly ignorant to the ideas behind theories of emergence, then
your attacks only appear more pathetic. I mean, really, I don't understand a
lot of quantum physics, but I know better than the try to sum up the field with
moronic little jibes, and then boohoo when someone who does understand points
out that I haven't got a clue.

[John]
Now that that's been established, would you mind educating an ignorant wood
cutter on the exact mechanism of the emergence of life, the universe and
everything?

[Arlo]
In one paragraph or less, right? And if I can't do that, well, the theories of
emergence are proven to be inadequate. 

Actually, the MOQ is a theory of emergence. It describes the random, chaotic,
unexpected, unpredictable occurrences as Dynamic Quality, and the AHA! latching
of these unexpected events into static patterns.

But if you want a "mechanism", some clock-work machine that chugs along and
predictably creates (and destroys), then neither the MOQ nor "emergence" is for
you. 

[John]
John the patiently waiting...

[Arlo]
Riiiight.