[MD] Congratulations America!

[Joseph Maurer]

Hi Andre,

You wrote:

"This sounds like dividing things up again, as SOM would have us do."

IMO MOQ relies on an insight into SQ/DQ.  DQ is undefined and is only known
through analogous or metaphorical terms.  This is an arrow pointing process.

A bow to shoot an arrow of discourse is possible but tricky.  The analogy of
a deity is used for a final principle.  The deity of the inorganic level is
the "bib bang", and mathematics is the language.

The Social, and Intellectual levels are more delicate and a "big bang" is
too difficult to envision.  I propose a conscious/Mechanical analogy for
DQ/SQ at the social and intellectual levels, with metaphor and analogy as
the interpreters.

I hope this helps.

Joe


On 11/11/08 2:19 AM, "Andre Broersen" <andrebroersen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Joe, glad you join this very interesting discussion.
> 
> I am not very clear on what you are proposing:
> 
> You say:
> 
> I propose a change of analogies for MOQ.  Instead of DQ/SQ at the
> intellectual level I propose Conscious/Mechanical as the analogy.
> There is a mechanical intellectual level O.  There is a conscious
> intellectual level S.
> 
> Andre:
> 
> This sounds like dividing things up again, as SOM would have us do. I feel
> uneasy about the term 'mechanical' do you mean the conventional S/O mode of
> reasoning? I think Pirsig , in his Brussel's SODV (?) paper suggested the
> pitfalls of such a mechanistic way of thinking. This term implies , for me,
> a removal of the Soc/Int. level. That is, a removal of the observer from
> that which is observed.
> 
> Could you please explain further. (in simple terms, as I am)
> 
> Andre
> 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/