[MD] irony and socrates

[John Carl]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 12:27 AM, <skutvik at online.no> wrote:

> Hi Todd (John negatively mentioned :)
>
> 20 Oct. u wrote:
>
> I had said...
> > > *) This is the Q-tenet of each lower level resisting any "system"
> > > above itself. Inorganic value trying its best to prevent life and so
> > > on upwards.
>
> John Carl said...
> > What a negative guy you can be sometimes Bo.  The very picture of
> > inorganic values grasping at death is ridiculous to me.
>
> I'm not negative but just try to hold up the MOQ against all
> "besserwissers" who are here to grind their own "axes" hardly having
> read Pirsig's works. You can't have by this above utterance.
>

Bo.  Now really.  You honestly want me to analyze the ridiculousness of
"inorganic value trying its best to prevent life"  in front of God and
everybody?  Because I will, if you insist.  We can talk about the chemical
compounds conspiring to turn chemistry professors into mush, or we can talk
about carbon being grabbed by the scruff of its covalent bonds and forced to
form chains against its "will".  It would be cute.  It could even be fun.
 But in the end it's all going to be as ridiculous as the law of gravity
hanging out in space and begging for somebody to reach out and invent it.

Intention and purpose are not commonly construed to inorganic patterns of
value, except in children's stories.

Let me guess.  You're a Disney fan.




> [tac] - Isn't that just the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics... That the
> > universe tends toward chaos... entropy increases unless "something"
> > prevents it.
>
>
Bo]


> You are right Todd, I just shudder at the mentioning of that particular
> "law" that meant so much negativity for me in my younger days  when
> my focus solely was in science - physics preferably - imagining the
> universe winding down to its "heat death" when all fission- and fusion-
> able matter have been  reduced to cinder and all heat evenly
> distributed to a few Kelvins. The MOQ was such a relief (and then this
> John Carl daring to call it "negative") and still is. My only concern is
> its
> beauty being "reduced to cinders" by nit-picking discussers who don't
> understand its very basics.  .
>
>
Well I posted a story a while back about my own encounter with entropy in
Ken Kesey's story, Demon Box, named after Maxwell's Demon - a thought
experiment by the famous physicist - that spelled out my understanding of
the despair and solution, all in one quick story.  Maybe you missed it.  But
I'll cut right to the chase for you Bo...

Entropy is only a problem in a closed system.  A SOM universe is a closed
system.  An MoQ one is not.  Definition is boundary-creation.  If Quality
cannot be defined, then  Cosmos isn't bounded.  If the cosmos isn't bounded,
then entropy doesn't get the last word.  So breathe easy my friend and put
away such negative notions as "atomic death wishes."



 but I seem to "see" the D/S in the original
> Romantic/Classic divide, yes, this divide in some or other form
> (Instable/Stable f.ex.) is the only possibly one to replace the S/OM.
>
> PS. At what level this takes place (that so many is preoccupied with) is
> irrelevant.


 The romantic/classic split is simply the metaphysical projection upon
reality of the human brain which is doing the perceiving.  Our left
brain/right brain orientation is built-in and thus the romantic/classic
differentiation is fundamental to consciousness.

Intellectual manipulation of the s/o kind that you say is the whole 4th
level, is just one half of the 4th and not even the leading edge.  The
romantic and emotional intuitive aspect of consciousness leads out in
evolution with the classical and logical explanations following and
objectifiying the primal knowledge after it has already formed as a feeling.
 This model is simple to understand and meets the facts as was know them
without conflict or ambiguity.  So to continually seek something different
is a choice you make for some reason.   Why?  What's your motive?  Is it as
Ian claims, simply a contrarian stance which you trot out for the attention
it gets?  Or is it because you are wrestling with the SOM collar around your
own neck and you need help getting it off.

Or both.

That's closer, eh?  Because you wouldn't need help if you didn't chafe under
the restriction of all-pervading intellect, it's simultaneously a plea for
help and a refusal of treatment.  What you really need is a good dose of
Zen, but you won't swallow that so...

Take an Art Show  and call me in the morning.

Dr. John