[MD] MOQ Levels

[Steven Peterson]

Hi Magnus,

Magnus to Bo:
>Yes, I guess we did agree about that, but not if we extrapolate from there. We 
>agree that "intelligence" is not the 4th level. However, you argue that the 4th 
>level is the S/O distinction, whereas I would say that memories, the content of 
>a book, or any other representation are intellectual patterns.
>
>"Thinking" on the other hand would be dynamic juggling of intellectual patterns. 
>  Throwing them together and causing dynamic intellectual quality events. I 
>still have no idea why other people can neither understand nor accept this 
>obvious description. There's no need to involve history, greeks, cavemen or 
>whatever.

Steve:

I like this discription of thinking, but I don't think that thinking is as completely dynamic as you seem to suggest. I think that most thinking is simply participating in well-established patterns of rationalization. Would you agree that thinking like all experience can be thought of as having both dynamic and static components.


Magnus:
>A "thought" can represent social value, it can determine a man's action and 
>thereby affect his social value. But it *is* NOT social value in itself, not 
>metaphysically. This is a very crucial distinction that most people here seem to 
>have missed.

Steve:
I think this is right on.

Regards,
Steve