[MD] The SOM/MOQ discrepancy.

[Joseph Maurer]

On Tuesday 16 December 2008 10:01 AM Arlo writes to Bo:

<snip>

I am NOT asking about what biological patterns became the "stepping
stone" to the social pattern. I am saying that before man existed,
before primates existed, WHAT responded to DQ?
 
I'll give you my answer. Everything. Plants responded biologically,
as did dinosaurs, and sabertooths, and mammothes, and bugs. All these
things responded to DQ biologically (and according to their
bio-complexity) as they CONTINUE to do today. If you propose that
they "lost" their ability to respond to DQ (as Platt does), then I
ask firmly for an example of what an animal could do BACK THEN (in
response to DQ) that it CAN NO LONGER DO today. What were DQ-enabled
animals in the Mesozoic able to do that present day UNDQ-ed animals
are no longer able to do?
 
Certainly you see the absurdity in saying that things "lost" the
ability to DQ when "man" appeared. (Another follow-up would be
"when?" Did animals in North America suddenly "lose" the ability to
respond to DQ when the first primate appeared in Africa? Or did
animals only lose this ability when they encountered man (when man
spread across the Siberian passage and into North America?)

<snip>

Hi Arlo and all,

Magnus proposes a ³big bang² at the beginning as DQ.  Evolution proposes
that reality manifests in levels.  DQ, then, is the existential order of
levels.  Whatever individual is in the level  responds to the DQ of that
level.  

Pirsig proposed 4 levels of evolution, 4 levels for DQ.  For myself I follow
the analogy to the musical octave and propose 7 levels for DQ.

Joe



On 12/16/08 10:01 AM, "Arlo Bensinger" <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:

> I am NOT asking about what biological patterns became the "stepping
> stone" to the social pattern. I am saying that before man existed,
> before primates existed, WHAT responded to DQ?
> 
> I'll give you my answer. Everything. Plants responded biologically,
> as did dinosaurs, and sabertooths, and mammothes, and bugs. All these
> things responded to DQ biologically (and according to their
> bio-complexity) as they CONTINUE to do today. If you propose that
> they "lost" their ability to respond to DQ (as Platt does), then I
> ask firmly for an example of what an animal could do BACK THEN (in
> response to DQ) that it CAN NO LONGER DO today. What were DQ-enabled
> animals in the Mesozoic able to do that present day UNDQ-ed animals
> are no longer able to do?
> 
> Certainly you see the absurdity in saying that things "lost" the
> ability to DQ when "man" appeared. (Another follow-up would be
> "when?" Did animals in North America suddenly "lose" the ability to
> respond to DQ when the first primate appeared in Africa? Or did
> animals only lose this ability when they encountered man (when man
> spread across the Siberian passage and into North America?)