[MD] Animate vs inanimate

Case Case at iSpots.com
Wed Oct 18 14:04:28 PDT 2006 

David M, and Ham,

My point is that the MoQ is about an indefinable reality manifested through
its static and dynamic properties. This is pure Taoism. Taoism recognizes
full well that nothing is purely static nor purely dynamic. What is mostly
static today might be mostly dynamic tomorrow.

As for Ham's sentient/nonsentient dualism this does not strike me as a
particularly fundamental dualism. I agree with you that the idea of rock
awareness is a little silly. I can see a sense in which there is the
continuous spectrum of awareness but by the time you get around to calling a
rock aware, you have modified the term so much as to render a common sense
meaning impossible.

Still it is clear to me that higher forms of awareness and functioning grow
out of the inanimate. Some around here, you for example, seem to think that
there is some higher form of consciousness using us as Playdough. This just
seems like wishful thinking. It allows us to escape responsibility for
establishing our own purpose but claiming purpose exists somewhere else and
is being handed to us.

As for not responding to you, perhaps the fault is mine but, on several
occasions I have answered your questions or raised new ones and have been
ignored. In fact after my last fairly sarcastic set of comments directed
your way, you disappeared for more than a week. I was genuinely concerned
that I had offended you.

We may actually agree on lots of things (I agree for example that subjective
awareness is important) but I just don't understand what you are talking
about most of the time. It has long been my opinion that for any set of
ideas to be lasting you need to be able to explain them to an eight year
old. I work hard to try to do this. You seem to hold the opposite view that
definition, redefinition and talking in code are the way to go. The net
result is we may just be talking past each other... Naaaaw, we really do
disagree.

By the way I was hurt not to be included in the Fringe group I have been
told many times I am not true blue to the MoQ.

Case

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of David M
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 1:30 PM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Animate vs inanimate

Hi Case

No breathing is optional, you can stop whilst conscious,
then when unconscious you strangely lose this option.

And isn't everything really wiggly? All particles/atoms
wiggle. The only kind of non wiggle we know is relative,
it is when atoms are in structures where the wiggles cancel
each other out and they stay relatively still.

So for you everything wiggles and is animate it seems.
So is inanimate meaningless?

Or if I sit really still have I become inanimate?

Been fun
David M

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Case" <Case at iSpots.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Animate vs inanimate


> David M,
>
> I would say this animate/inanimate thingy precedes SOM. I think it IS the
> MoQ. Things wiggle or they hold still. Subjects and Object arise from this
> combination of activity and inactivity. And they are further influenced by
> wiggling and stillness at higher levels.
>
> I don't get your equating choice with animate and necessity with the
> inanimate. Breathing is necessary but animated. Sometimes choices are
> necessary.
>
> But I could just be a bit dense.
>
> Case
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of David M
> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 2:42 PM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] Animate vs inanimate
>
> Hi Case
>
> I wonder if the animate/inanimate distinction
> can stand without SOM. Is not MOQ a skepticism about
> processes having distinct causes. Without SOM how can we
> distinguish choice (animated activity) from necessity (inanimate 
> activity)?
>
> David M
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Case" <Case at iSpots.com>
> To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 9:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [MD] Animate vs inanimate
>
>
>> Hey Guys,
>>
>> Just to chime in here I think the animate/inanimate distinction is one of
>> those fundamental dualisms you run into the more you look into things. It
>> reminds me of several such dualisms in which I can discriminate how they
>> are
>> different and can generalize some similarities as well. In other words
>> these
>> are dualisms that look different but point in the same direction. Here 
>> are
>> some:
>>
>> Animate Inanimate
>> Wave Particle
>> Infinity Zero
>>
>> And dare I say it?
>>
>> Dynamic Static
>>
>> Case
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
>> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of David M
>> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 1:00 PM
>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>> Subject: Re: [MD] Animate vs inanimate
>>
>> Hi Gene
>>
>> I agree, I think these terms assume SOM and
>> would be difficult to give them a meaning within an MOQ
>> outlook. Unless it can be used as a divide between
>> quality motivated behaviour that is fairly repetitive
>> like water running down a slope, ice melting in heat,
>> and more complex behaviour that has a take it or leave
>> it aspect, like animal movements or eating.
>>
>> Perhaps there is also a wider question about how much ordinary
>> language has SOM assumptions built into it.
>>
>> David M
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Gene M" <boredandunstable at gmail.com>
>> To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
>> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 12:11 AM
>> Subject: Re: [MD] Animate vs inanimate
>>
>>
>>>I am totally uncertain what this question is even in reference too. But
>>>that
>>> won't stop me from giving a half assed answer! And maybe we can build up
>>> something from there.
>>>
>>> Patterns exist on each level. The inorganic level would probably be
>>> called
>>> "inanimate" by most. The level of Matter, physics, chemistry, things 
>>> like
>>> that. And as inanimate as it is called, it's pretty full of stuff! It's
>>> in
>>> constant motion, moving, changing and shifting. Probably the most
>>> unstable
>>> level frankly. At least, at it's own scale. For us it's dead as dirt.
>>> Literally.
>>>
>>> Beyond that, the biological level would almost certainly be called
>>> "animate". Since it is where all biological creatures reside. From the
>>> lowly
>>> bacterias to our very bodies.
>>>
>>> Those are very SOM terms I find however, they are a way for them to 
>>> split
>>> up
>>> objective Reality and describe it. I can't even Begin to imagine where 
>>> to
>>> place social and intellectual patterns in those two categories.
>>>
>>> All in all I find them Extremely unsatisfying and suggest throwing them
>>> away
>>> forever.
>>>
>>> -Gene
>>>
>>> On 10/15/06, David M <davidint at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi MOQers
>>>>
>>>> I wonder, in MOQ does the distinction between
>>>> animate and inanimate patterns hold up? And if
>>>> so how does the MOQ explain/describe this distinction?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> David M
>>>>
>>> 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/
>>>
>>
>>
>> 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/
>>
>> 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/
>>
>
>
> 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/
>
> 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/
> 


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/

More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list