[MD] MOQ and the Future: An Inquiry into Usefulness

[ARLO J BENSINGER JR]

[Platt]
This creative force, DQ, precludes your nihilistic idea that the universe 
evolved as the result of dumb luck, or miraculously "emerged" from a kind of
pseudoscientific pantheistic poker game.

[Arlo]
And so we revert back to theism. I had hopes, given your reply to Steve, you
were really understanding this. Apparently I was wrong.

Quality does not "create". Creation occurs as a response to Quality. 

MOQ Evolution is AHA! It is "unexpected". You can keep saying "dumb luck" and
your usual evasion Wuritzers, but at least you admit that there is "no plan".
Without a "plan", there was never any guarantee that "we" would be here. A
fluke asteroid, a renegade virus, a differently time solar flare, and viola!...
no "man". So yes, I'd say it is pretty lucky the biological pattern "man"
emerged.

And that is perhaps the key that keeps you from showing any understanding here,
Platt. Free value responses, interwoven across the spectrum of inorganic and
up, act in their own interest, not ours. Nothing manipulates them to set the
stage for our appearance. 

The MOQ is emergentist. Patterns (SQ) emerge as a free value response to DQ.
Not by some manipulative external orchestration.

So answer my questions, Platt. 

Did "Quality create the MOQ"? What about Pirsig? Do you really think saying
"Quality created the MOQ" is better than saying "the MOQ emerged from Pirsig's
free value responses to DQ"? Did "Quality create the Mona Lisa"? What role did
the artist play? 










On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 12:25 PM plattholden at gmail.com wrote:
>
>Glad to see after loads of muddled verbiage and misquoting of what I 
>said you acknowledge a creative evolutionary force in the universe such 
>as Pirsig describes:
>
>"The force of evolutionary creation is contained by substance. 
>Substance is just one kind of static pattern left behind by the creative 
>force." (Lila, 17)  
>
>This creative force, DQ, precludes your nihilistic idea that the universe  
>evolved as the result of dumb luck, or miraculously "emerged" from a 
>kind of pseudoscientific pantheistic poker game.
>
>So you agree with me, finally. Would be manly of you to admit it,  but 
>I'm not holding my breath.
>
>
>On 15 Nov 2009 at 10:46, ARLO J BENSINGER JR wrote:
>
>> [Platt to Steve]
>> There's no evidence it is some sort of higher intelligence or acts in accord
>> with a predetermined plan. 
>> 
>> [Arlo]
>> This is actually good to hear. When you said that quarks value things in
order
>> to make the cosmos recognizable to man, it leaves little room for anything
BUT
>> a "predetermined plan". I mean, how else could you explain that billions and
>> billions of years ago, quarks acted in the best interest of "man"?
>> 
>> In saying the above, whether or not you will admit it, you actually admit
>> agreement with me. We are here not by some "plan", but by "chance". We are
here
>> as the emergent result of billions of years of "responses to Quality". You
>> cannot escape the probability that we would not be here, our presence was
never
>> certain. 
>> 
>> Given this, I am not sure why you feel it is more in line with the MOQ to say
>> "Quality created the MOQ" rather than "the MOQ emerged from Pirsig's
responses
>> to Quality". Can you not see where the former removes "freedom" and "Bob"
from
>> the equation, the latter preserves both. And it does so without implying that
>> there is any "plan" or greater force that created the MOQ. 
>> 
>> Again, take the statement "Quality created carbon atoms". It denies any free
>> value preference to the subatomic particles, the very value preference the
MOQ
>> is built upon. In the same way saying "Quality created the Mona Lisa" removes
>> any free value response from the artist.
>> 
>> Also given this, I am glad to see you've finally accepted that the MOQ is
>> emergentist, an AHA! metaphysics, and that DQ is unexpectedness, and with
this
>> unexpectedness is the acceptance that "we" are here by "chance", a ratched
AHA!.
>
>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/
>
>