[MD] Reductionism

[markhsmit]

Hi Krimel,
Nice to hear from you.
On Jun 10, 2009, at 2:34:59 PM, Krimel <Krimel at Krimel.com> wrote:

[Willblake2 to John]
Because Quality has direction, that is it is leading evolution, it would 
seem to me that it is differentiated.  It creates hierarchies of SQ/DQ.  At 
one point,I asked if it was similar to the Tao, which in my impression is
undifferentiated.
The Tao is simply creative in a circular manner, that is, not directional.

[Krimel]
This is one of the ideas that has basically run the MoQ into a ditch.
Evolution is the end result of massively numerous random walks. Such we can
look back, see where we have been and call it "good". But it tells us very
little about the future other than that we have an almost unfettered ability
to look back at the past and call it "good".
Willblake2
Sounds like you are thinking a little like me about evolution.  I'm not sure how random these
walks are, since they are under immense control, both from the inside and from the outside.
The rules that evolution has to abide by are numerous.  Random would imply a certain amount
of freedom to go any which way.  It is true that evolution only has hindsight, kind of like the
stock market, or a football game, however both those contain rules.  Quality would appear
to have rules, if I understand it correctly.  It is these rules which create the distinct hierarchies 
mentioned in Lila.  Something that is undifferentiated has no focus.


I also do not think Tao is circular since that would actually make it
directional.
Willblake2
I suppose a circle is directional if one is in it.  I don't want to get semantic about it.
This is simply the expression of the Tao.  Conservation of energy.
If I take a scientific look at the world, it is fairly clear that many things are cyclical.
By  directional I meant with a beginning and a destination other than the beginning.
By cyclical, I am merely expression my sense of the world, yours may be different.
As I see it everything repeats itself endlessly in different time frames.


[Willblake2]
If both the Tao and Quality are considered the underlying fabric of reality.

Quality is continually creating a better tapestry.  The Tao is creating the
same tapestry over and over again.

[Krimel]
I think there is no distinction between Tao and Quality. I think you are
right that there are distinctions that can be made and lots of MoQers make
them but for the most parts those distinction diminish the MoQ.
Willblake2
The Tao does not claim to influence human behavior in the creation of better things, the
way that Quality does.  Quality has a system by which it is expressed, in layers, not the 
Tao.  I would be content to think that Quality and the Tao are the same, but the underlying
philosophy does not seem to fit.

I'm not sure what you mean by diminish the MoQ, is this a celebrity contest?


[Willblake2]
I had another question that I asked, and that was: was Quality monotheistic
or pluralistic.  Is it the same as Brahman, or is it a guiding force
interacting?

[Krimel]
I think both the MoQ and Taoism are forms of pantheistic monism. But that's
just me.
Willblake2
That works for me.  One has a finger pointing somewhere, the other has no finger at all, just a
beating heart.





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/