[MD] Quantum computing

[Magnus Berg]

Hi Bo

> Are we to stop citing Pirsig and talking about the MOQ?

Yes please.

>> Need I remind you of the difference between philosophy and
>> philosophology?
> 
> The day the MOQ is part of academica and Pirsig is a household 
> word you may quip like that, but as it is with a mere handful of 
> people knowing about the  MOQ it's not very appropriate to start 
> undermining it with weird interpretations and new levels.

By the time the MoQ is part of academia, it will be too late. And since I see 
the problems I see with your view, I don't think it has any chance of ever 
getting there. Which is why I'm trying to get your attention to the real issues.

> OK, I 
> have my intellectual issue, but I use Pirsigs reasoning to point out 
> that SOL interpretation is MOQ's very heart and soul. 

And I use real world observations to point out why my view is required to 
explain those observations.

> And as said I clearly see where you veer off course, as shown in 
> the post below. Your social value is about organization models 
> and the technicalities behind it, but when one sees the 3rd. level 
> in light of what its role is regarding biology and intellect's vs 
> society, its true value emerges.    

Ok, I'll address your concerns below one by one, but since I've done that 
several times before, I haven't much hope of getting through.

>>> 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.   

I'm not denying that social quality is about "patterns of culture that the 
anthropologist study". I'm just adding that it's *also* about smaller societies. 
You keep telling me there's no point in seeing societies in smaller and smaller 
scales, but are you really saying that only humans have societies?

The example you mention, a beehive, is *certainly* bound by social value. A 
beehive have rigorous social rules that determine how the different types of 
bees contribute to the society, and that social value most certainly regulates 
any biological urges of the single bees. Don't you think all the males want to 
mate with the queen? But if all did, it would not be a beehive anymore, it would 
cause just the same type of chaos that human religion is supposed to stop.


>>> 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.       

You don't see how intellect interferes with bodies? Of course it does! My 
fingers writing this mail are controlled right now by nerve impulses sent from 
my brain. That's how intellectual patterns control my body.

>>> 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.

I think I'm beginning to see the root of our disagreement. You seem to be using 
the MoQ only to solve human related problems, large scale political and 
religious matters etc. You don't seem to care much about smaller scales but 
merely pushes everything smaller than human societies into the 
biological/inorganic buckets.

But that simply doesn't work in the long run, and the beehive you brought up is 
a very good example. How on earth can you explain the behavior of a beehive 
using only inorganic and biological value?

>>> 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.               

I think this is where *you* wander off into... I don't know what exactly. The 
MoQ *is* a metaphysics. And a metaphysics must be able to encompass all of 
reality, including itself, so there's no reason to start inventing a 
meta-meta-physics just to be able to talk about it. If it where, you would then 
need a meta-meta-meta-physics to discuss that, and then...

	Magnus