[MD] The SOM/MOQ discrepancy.

[X Acto]

Agree!  great post, and thank you for the correction, the term self referential is what I was after.
I think an enlightened appoach to the concept of a "God" is viewing us as a
complexity-emergent self-referentiality. 

thanks Arlo
-Ron




________________________________
From: Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu>
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2008 12:58:17 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] The SOM/MOQ discrepancy.

[Ron]
Due to the fact that biological life is present in the universe, one could argue that reality is indeed a self reflecting system.. What that means or what that entails I'm not sure I know. But it does seem to be an existing feature.

[Arlo]
Hey, I am all about self-referential systems (I prefer the term to "self-reflecting", as the latter seems passive). Self-referentiality seems to be a cornerstone of evolutionary progress (Hofstadter writes a great deal on this). Its the nature of that "self-referentiality" that's at issue. And I'd say there is a world of difference between a complexity-emergent self-referentiality and a needy Deity who needs "its magnificence" worshipped and so creates "man" to fill allay its vanity.

I'd also argue that in the MOQ, it is not only at the appearance of "biological life" that the cosmos gains self-referentiality, but it certainly does advance it a great deal from the inorganic level. Indeed, I'd say that biological level is the result of (admittedly simple and humdrum) self-referentiality on the inorganic level. Thus there is (IMHO) not a difference in kind, but a difference in degree, with the fundamental processes by which ALL MOQ levels emerge from the previous level.


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/