[MD] Distinguishing Levels (Individual level)

[Stephen Hannon]

Hi Gene and Platt

[Gene]
What if I were to claim that Every level has individuals and
collectives. A single carbon molecule, and DNA. One, and Many.
Biologically, a cell and a raccoon.

[Steve H]
In David Morey's Forum essay on Arthur Young, he used Light,
Particles, Atoms, Molecules, Plants, Animals, and Man to represent the
Inorganic and Biological levels.  It seems to me that the hierarchy
progresses from individuals to collectives

[Gene]
The only thing an idea can destroy, is other ideas. Sure a person had that
idea, but most ideas don't pick up force until that person has given it away
to his followers. A single idea can only destroy a larger idea, if it
carries social backing behind it. Intellectual patterns of value, shared by
a social collective, are the most likely way to change anything. A single
man, fighting the system, Can accomplish things, but never on his own. Not
anymore, I'd say.

[Steve H]
Intellectual Quality has more potential than Social Quality.  From my
own Forum essay:

"A society, a form of Social Quality, has more potential than an
individual man, a form of Biological Quality.  Each individual man is
constrained by society, usually by laws.  America's laws must conform
to the ideals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which
are a form of Intellectual Quality.  These ideals have more potential
than the laws themselves.  For example, the Bill of Rights, part of
American law, is specific to this country but life and liberty are
ideals embraced by many societies."

Does this make sense?

Steve H

On 6/5/06, Platt Holden <pholden at davtv.com> wrote:
> [Gene]
> > We all think we're right, that's why we argue so strenuously for our
> > ideas. One should mentally append "probably" to everything I say. It's
> > just inconvenient to do it physically. I pretty much assume everything I
> > know is provisional, but it's easier to talk as if you believed what you
> > said.
>
> I assume you mean add "probably" to everything you say when you are
> talking about philosophical ideas. If it's raining outside do you think
> you need to add "probably" when you report, "It's raining outside? Or
> the "U.S. dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima?." Or  "My great, great
> grandfather is dead?"
>
> > What if I were to claim that Every level has individuals and
> > collectives. A single carbon molecule, and DNA. One, and Many.
> > Biologically, a cell and a raccoon. Does the cell try and destroy the
> > raccoon? No. A virus might. So let's say the Virus is an Individual
> > biologically, and it is attempting to destroy the collective of the
> > Raccoon. Is it moral? That's the best analogy I can come up with to the
> > social level. Here, a single Human, and their Culture are the individual
> > and collective, no? So is it moral for one man to try and destroy his
> > culture? It's like a virus attacking the man. And on the intellectual
> > level, a single idea would be the individual, and a complex web of
> > ideas, such as physics let's say, would be the collective. So that one
> > idea could try and destroy the collective. However if the collective is
> > resilient it'll only Alter it.
> >
> > What I'm trying to say is that individual human beings Only have
> > importance as such on the social level. Me vs. Everyone, is not
> > Intellectual Quality vs. Social Quality. It's Social Quality vs. Social
> > Quality. It's part of the natural cycle of a society. The Brujo story
> > has nothing to do with Intellect vs. Social, it's about Dynamic vs.
> > Static. Purely on the Social Level. The misfits and outcasts in any
> > society are the most likely to perceive DQ and lead the society towards
> > it, because they're outside it slightly. This story never even touches
> > on Intellectual Quality at all.
>
> The misfits and outcasts are individuals wouldn't you say? That's been
> my point all along. They are the catalysts for moral evolution, not the
> mob.
>
> > The only thing an idea can destroy, is other ideas. Sure a person had
> > that idea, but most ideas don't pick up force until that person has
> > given it away to his followers. A single idea can only destroy a larger
> > idea, if it carries social backing behind it. Intellectual patterns of
> > value, shared by a social collective, are the most likely way to change
> > anything. A single man, fighting the system, Can accomplish things, but
> > never on his own. Not anymore, I'd say.
> >
> > Do you see what I'm saying?
>
> All you are saying IMO is that no one person every painted a picture or
> designed a war memorial or came up with an original theory or saved a
> Zuni tribe from extinction.  Everything is done by committee. I don't
> buy it for a minute.
>
> Platt
>
>
>
>
>
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>