[MD] Quantum computing

[skutvik at online.no]

Platt, Magnus and All

I agree with Platt on this issue, but I think Magnus is into a blind 
alley of his own. Social quality isn't about societies rather it is the  
value whose purpose is to regulate/control/thwart biological value 
- the latter most grotesquely categorized as eating and 
copulating. Social patterns "... are the patterns of culture that the 
anthropologist study" Pirsig says and the anthros don't study the 
social traditions of cells in a body or of bees in a hive. But there 
is no human culture without strong regulations/ limitations on the 
biological aspect of existence. For instance religions' obsession 
with limiting sexual license and rules about food and general 
behavior, dress codes ...etc. just to mention a small aspect of this 
social juggernaut.   

We also see how mistaken Magnus is regarding social value  
when we look to intellectual value whose purpose is - in turn - to 
regulate/ control/thwart social value. In no possible way can we 
see that intellect interferes with bodies and/or anthills or hinders 
the general formation of human societies, but very much how its 
individual rights, worth and freedom, judicial and social, 
democracy ..etc constantly butt against the most "social" culture 
there is: The islamic one.       

Magnus' claim of gaining explanatory power by seeing "societies" 
all over the place is not an increase in MOQ's explanatory power 
- that he leaves in ruins - but perhaps in scientific such, and much 
has been achieved by sociology and perhaps physics by seeing 
things that way, but in that case he is re-inventing the wheel. 
Anyway, we are committed to leave science - or the STATIC 
intellectual level - in favor of the MOQ meta-level. Well, Magnus 
is not the only one who loiter around there.               

IMO

Bo







On 14 Mar 2007 at 9:40, pholden at davtv.com wrote:

> Quoting Magnus Berg <McMagnus at home.se>:
> 
> > pholden at davtv.com wrote:
> 
> > > Seems to me a "thing" belongs to the level of its highest evolved
> > > state. Thus, while a jellyfish consists of inorganic level
> > > "things" (atoms, molecules and such)but belongs as a manifestation
> > > to the biological level -- and so forth on up the evolution of
> > > consciousness ladder until you arrive at the independent thinking
> > > human individual, the highest form of evolutionary progress to
> > > date.
> > 
> > It may seem simpler at first sight to do that. But it backfires
> > pretty fast for (at least) three reasons:
> > 
> > 1. You get the fuzzy borders between the levels
> 
> A little fuzziness here and there is OK. I don't know of any category
> that can't be accused of being a little fuzzy at the edges. For
> example, biologists are still arguing about what constitutes a
> species.
> 
> > 2. The dimensional aspect of the levels gets hidden and is replaced
> > by a ladder view, which only causes arguments about what thing
> > belongs where. The inorganic value of a thing is not removed just
> > because it's alive. In other words, you still have weight, even
> > though you happen to have legs to move that weight around.
> 
> If you keep in mind that upper levels are supported by the lower I
> don't see a problem. As for arguments, they will always occur no
> matter how you divide up experience. So they're unavoidable.  
> 
> > 3. In my view, animals are societies of organs, but that doesn't
> > mean they lose their biological value. If you use your level rule
> > above, it would end up in the social level, but that might not be
> > the best way to describe an animal. (In fact, I'd even raise it to
> > the intellectual level. Please read back a few posts in this thread
> > to see why.)
> 
> Like Pirsig, I would reserve the social level to human beings so as to
> avoid the issues you raise which muddies the waters without adding
> much to the evolutionary moral hierarchy.  
> 
> Platt
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------
> This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
> 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/
> 
>