[MD] MOQ and SOM

[Joseph Maurer]

On 6/29/09 7:55 AM, "John Carl" <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
 
> Huh?  There's all kinds of logic in evolution:  can't have two fathers
> simultaneously, genetic rules, etc.  I guess its how you look at "logic".
>  Considered as "the rules of the game" then its just a matter of picking and
> defining your game.
 
Hi John and all,

A computer cannot be programmed to compute the undefined.  In Bo¹s
exposition of SOL he asked what is undefined?  The thousand-tongued hydra of
language on mother earth indicates that ³L² is undefined.  Even a creator
cannot program a defined language for the undefined.  Metaphor, analogy,
philosophy, poetry, literature  replace mathematics for the most complete
communication though not the most rigorously logical.

As far as logic goes, mathematics 1+1=2 is the most rigorous logic.  Even a
creator cannot program a computer to divide 1 by 0.  There is a fault line
in such a perception, leading to an error message.  Mathematical logic is
not metaphysical logic.  Which one is more comprehensive?

Aristotle tried to cross that fault line by describing a divided existence.
In his psychology he proposed an intentional existence for S, a real
existence for O, thereby creating SOM metaphysics.   Pirsig, in a
Metaphysics Of Quality, accepts DQ as perceivable, but indefinable.   Where
is the logic in that?

I accept Pirsig¹s description of evolution, and conclude that evolution can
be perceived as a moral hierarchy in existence.  He proposes four levels,
but I prefer to use the musical scale for 7 levels of evolution.  I think
Aristotle had the right idea of dividing existence, but he got it wrong.
Evolution, MOQ, is a fuller concept than SOM.  I do not perceive logic in a
hierarchy of existence.  The perception of DQ is of the moment, the
thousand-tongued Hydra.

Joe  



On 6/29/09 7:55 AM, "John Carl" <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:

> Huh?  There's all kinds of logic in evolution:  can't have two fathers
> simultaneously, genetic rules, etc.  I guess its how you look at "logic".
>  Considered as "the rules of the game" then its just a matter of picking and
> defining your game.