[MD] MOQ/BOC

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

I've been away working in the dirt and despite other intentions
thinking quite a bit. Reading over them, these thoughts seem a bit
jumbled but I want to try and get them down while they seem fresh in
my mind. Please forgive any inconsistencies; this is a very rough
draft.

Khoo, in a recent post, mentions the potential value of marrying East
and West when it comes to philosophy. I agree; so let's in an effort
to clarify both the MOQ and the Book of Changes compare both
documents:

The language of the Book of Changes (BOC) is a method of
differentiation, as is the language of the MOQ. Any method of
differentiation can be seen as a process where the point is to define
a particular "something" amongst many. This process acts to zoom in on
a "something," to isolate it, and zoom in further to acquire details
where the details themselves become "somethings."

This process reflects the use of recursion, where, as the process
concentrates focus on a something, it differentiates within the
previously differentiated and so on, and from there identifies the
contents of that something until all elements, all parts, of the
something have been clearly defined and in doing so has that
something, as a whole, been identified.

"In this plain of understanding static patterns of value are divided
into four systems: inorganic patterns, biological patterns, social
patterns and intellectual patterns. They are exhaustive. That's all
there are. If you construct an encyclopedia of four topics-Inorganic,
Biological, Social and Intellectual-nothing is left out. No "thing,"
that is. Only Dynamic Quality, which cannot be described in any
encyclopedia, is absent." [LILA]

The MOQ states that reality can be sorted into four evolutionary
levels. That's all there is. The BOC, on the other hand, uses 64
hexagrams to describe reality. Since we cannot possibly map "all there
is" in a 1:1 format, the BOC as well as the MOQ must predominately use
analogy and metaphor to describe "all there is." The MOQ is a map that
describes the territory. It is not the territory itself. How could it
be? Reality shifts and changes constantly. As soon as we nail it down,
poof, it is gone.

Looking to the four levels of the MOQ, it seems that as we move from
the lower levels to the upper we move from the general to the
particular. Just as every biological pattern of value is also an
inorganic pattern but not all inorganic patterns are biological, every
social pattern is an intellectual pattern but not all intellectual
patterns are social. The hallmark of intellect is discrimination. This
discrimination applies to the hexagrams in the BOC as well. Starting
at the baseline, all four levels of the MOQ can be seen within each
hexagram.

Each hexagram of the BOC can be seen as complete in itself yet in the
language of the BOC, each hexagram is entangled within the context of
all other hexagrams. In the language of the MOQ, each level is
entangled within the context of all other levels to make up the whole.
Each level will contribute an expressiveness to any other level. And
that expressiveness is only describable by analogy to the
characteristics of some other level. Since, like the BOC, the MOQ is
supposed to contain "all there is" it should be able to include
itself. I'd like to take some time and explore how it does that, as
well as how we can define a level through the association of all other
levels.

"This classification of patterns is not very original, but the
Metaphysics of Quality allows an assertion about them that is unusual.
It says they are not continuous. They are discrete. They have very
little to do with one another. Although each higher level is built on
a lower one it is not an extension of that lower level. Quite the
contrary. The higher level can often be seen to be in opposition to
the lower level, dominating it, controlling it where possible for its
own purposes." [LILA]

In the language of the MOQ, each successive level can be seen as in
opposition to the lower. This gives us two semantic poles to a level's
definition. This duality of opposition runs within each level as well
as in between each level. For example, starting with the inorganic
level as a base line, we transition into biological patterns of value
that take inorganic patterns and usurp them to their own purposes.

Transitioning to social patterns of value, we see how biological
patterns are usurped and used by the Giant for its own purposes... we
only have to think of the human resource department at any
corporation. In addition, within the social level, religions have
played a major role in in the advancement of science (which is nothing
but the obliteration of the old ways) as well as in never-ending war
and bigotry.

And finally, intellectual patterns value freedom from any social
constraints. But there's discord within the intellectual level too.
For instance, subject/object metaphysics is seen as a high quality
system of pattern of value. SOM proposes that reality is composed of
subjects and objects. Period.

But the MOQ opposes it in that SOM presupposes value lies in either
the subject or the object, or both, since subjects and objects are all
there is. The MOQ states that subjects and objects arise from Quality,
not the other way around. In the MOQ, reality is composed of patterns
of value rather than subjects and objects.
"But although the four systems are exhaustive they are not exclusive.
They all operate at the same time and in ways that are almost
independent of each other." [LILA]

Each level is a representation, or a set, of qualities. Each level
represents a quality extracted from the duality of opposition. In one
sense, we might look at the MOQ as an exponentiation reflecting the
application of an opposing set of relationships within each level,
with each level embedded within a context set by the previous. In
building our understanding of reality in this manner, we move from the
general to the particular. This is but half the story though, if we
include a focus on going "down" once we reach the top of the MOQ
hierarchy.

Due to the manner in which the hexagrams of the BOC are formed, each
is in fact made up of its own nature plus the input of all other
levels. And in the MOQ, when we focus on any one level, what is
reflected is the influence of context on the expression of some
archetype through that context. In other words, we can consider each
level like a hexagram, as having a spectrum made up of influences from
all other levels, seen through the context of the level under
consideration. It seems plausible to consider that this Dynamic
differentiation is how the MOQ includes an expression of itself within
itself, as does the BOC. A book contains itself, of course.

"So what the Metaphysics of Quality concludes is that all schools are
right on the mind-matter question. Mind is contained in static
inorganic patterns. Matter is contained in static intellectual
patterns. Both mind and matter are completely separate evolutionary
levels of static patterns of value, and as such are capable of each
containing the other without contradiction.' [LILA]

Matter starts as an idea, a static intellectual pattern of value. An
idea starts in the mind, a static inorganic pattern of value. These
separate evolutionary levels define each other by their opposition.
Looking to the BOC, each hexagram is constructed of bits of
information encoded in lines representing complementary features of
reality. Each hexagram is an idea that defines itself through the
opposition of other hexagrams as well as the lines themselves.

Tired now,

Thanks for reading,

Dan