[MD] Distinguishing Levels (Individual level)

[Case]

[Ham]
Case doesn't want to consider Ham's premise, and instead expresses his love
for chaos:

[Case]
Case also gets a kick out of occasionally referring to himself in the third
person. He does indeed have a fondness for ideas that further his
understanding of a broad range of subjects. Evolution and Chaos theory are
among these. He also thinks the Pirsig's ideas provide a metaphysical
framework for these very concepts. 

[Ham]
I gave my reasons in my post to David.  You evidently think the universe
organizes itself out of chaos.  I suppose then that if you were to believe
in a primary cause it would be chaos itself or a chaotic Creator.

[Case]
Sorry Case did not get the notes on the first lecture. He thinks that
fundamentally it is all a probability distribution. How likely is it, that
something could result from nothing? Case thinks not very. But he thinks
that if it has ANY likelihood at all it is inevitable. He doesn't think that
idea really qualifies as a Creator in a meaningful way. But if Ham wants to
think about it that way, Case is cool with it.

[Ham]
For someone who admits I'm "too late" and who claims that chaos has all the
answers, you are extremely inquisitive.

[Case]
Case usually skips over Hams posts because they seem to be in foreign
language and about topics don't really connect to anything real or imagined.
But Case has the 4th of July weekend off and nothing better to do that read
and write MoQ posts which he enjoys immensely. So having happened on Ham
during a lull, he decided to jump in. Case thinks he is actually being very
rude to Ham who seems like a really nice is somewhat stuffy sort. Case is
unlikely to continue with this for long.

[Ham]
Having been down this road before, I've learned that discussion is futile
unless my challenger is capable of sensing the value of order and beauty -- 
not chaos -- and whose reason tells him there is more to reality than an
evolutionary stream of images.  If you can't extend your perspective beyond
the happenstance of objectivism, neither of us has anything to gain by
discussing a philosophy of Essence.

[Case]
Case has no desire to challenge Ham. Case sees order as a required
consequence of chaos and finds its beauty and structure amazing. Case thinks
it is very cool that he can never put the same foot in the same evolutionary
stream twice. Case's perspective extends beyond time and space. He leaves no
leaf unturned in his search for new perspective. He reads the Tao, He hugs
the Buddha. He thinks Jesus Christ is a Superstar. Case has tickets to a
Counting Crows Concert. Case watched Crash and listened to Jonathan Miller
interview Daniel Dennett today but his wife made him fix the refrigerator
and die twice in Norrath. This Case is an all purpose kind of guy. Case was
even willing to give Ham the time a day but sadly found that time
Essentially wasted.

[Ham]
If your interest in Essentialism was genuine, you would be asking for
clarification of one or two specific points, not challenging every statement
I've made.  I question both your "intentions" and your "open mind", and
suspect that you're already a member in good standing with the collective.

[Case]
Ham has pegged Case correctly as a smart ass. Case has no real interest in
learning a new word today. He still thinks "postmodern" must be about either
Mad Max or Star Trek and can't decide which. Case is concerned that if he
were truly able to open his mind a lot of rubbish would blow in. After
looking through a peephole all he sees is Ham out there with a fan and a
carton of medieval and pre-Christian parchments. 

Case thinks the third person perspective makes him a bit obnoxious and he
should give it up. He wishes Ham well. But he thinks Ham should lighten up,
come down to earth, quit dropping names and speaking in vague generalities.
He thinks Ham should practice using the word "therefore" in sentences where
it fits and that Ham should not ask us to draw conclusions from propositions
we have no reason to care about.