[MD] Sin Part 1

[David M]

Hi Haydar

Thanks for the below can you say more about organised matter?

Regards
David M


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <hzeytin at gmail.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 10:22 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Sin Part 1


Good time to jump in the river it seems.
I can't/ won't deem to be a radical evolutionist, but want point to certain 
aspects of it.
"Survival of the fittest" equals Darwinism, is what is now called Social 
Darwinism. Evolution is not limited to survival of the fittest, but simply a 
function of variation, mutation and adaptation. Moreover when it comes to 
MoQ perspective, recent discussions on multi-level group adaptation would 
need to be factored in, which in mainstream is controversial, but was one of 
the catchpoints for me in reading MoQ, how Pirsig views it, I.e. his 
explanation of NYC as a "organisation".
Secondly, the molecular biological nature of evolution (which I am one of 
those that doesn't believe that evolution is not only applicable to organic 
matter but e.g. to mobile phones, or music or ideas as well), is I believe a 
perfect home for what again surprised me very pleasantly when I read Pirsig 
mention how inorganic matter "behaves" in a way that recognizes value. Of 
course biology does not act against physics and chemistry. It IS physics and 
chemistry in an "organized" form! Hence the inorganic-organic, as is the 
further organization of the organic forming the social level. It is 
evolution (within time) that allow for some individuals and their attempts 
for creating social ties and structures to succeed and grow. And, ultimately 
it is the intellect that whatever knowledge it derives from the 
multi-layered social interactions keeps reshaping the perception of all the 
levels it evolves from in a perpetual cycle.
Third, I read there was some consensus that agents within evolutionary 
process are fundamentally selfish. Well it is not so. Will need to dig out 
recent research on this for you, but it has become more and more 
demonstrable that within groups there is a healthy mix of altruism and 
selfishness in all agents, and usually its a matter of "who's turn it is 
this time". One common example is the V shaped flight of the geese where 
everyone behind the leader benefit from the aerodynamic lift she creates 
with most effort, and eventually the ones at the tails who appear as "free 
riders" at first sight take their turns to lead.
***
Eventually I'll need to read through the archives, and listen more to see 
what's been covered here, but love to get back on the atheist-bashing I see 
here quite so often,(if anybody sees it worthwhile :) I would love to hear 
more about the combatibility of MoQ with God. My argument would be that MoQ 
leaves no room for a creator. No-thingness is what it is.
Best wishes to all,
Haydar
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
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/