[MD] Thus spoke Lila

[ADRIE KINTZIGER]

re
Hi , Arlo.

What is asked for, another level, a superawarenesslevel,an intelligence
level
is probably all a disguisemantle for a "undividual level"
Its like asking for the vault's combination in fact.
Adrie

2010/12/7 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com>

> Hi Arlo,
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:
> > [Mark]
> > I don't think we need to see it as an endless paradox.  We can assume
> both
> > structures are looking at each other.
> >
> > [Arlo]
> > I assume here you mean a MOQ and "SOL" are structures looking at each
> other.
> > Are there other structures? Or just these two.
>
> [Mark]
> Yes, there are many ways to construct reality.  Spooky isn't it?  But
> in this case I would say that MOQ is looking at Western Philosophy as
> discussed by Pirsig.  We can state that one has higher Quality than
> the other if we want, and it creates meaning for us.
> >
> >
> > Still waiting to here if this new structure is DQ or SQ or some other new
> > non-SQ/non-DQ type of whatever.
>
> [Mark]
> For me it is not some other new one, I am happy with Quality.
> >
> > [Mark]
> > This top down approach is not necessary in MOQ in my opinion, it can be
> SSL
> > (subject subject), or OOL (object object).
> >
> > [Arlo]
> > So where do you place a MOQ then? As an intellectual pattern (along with
> > Pirsig) or as a superordinate fifth-level above intellect (along with the
> > SOLists)? Or somewhere else entirely?
>
> [Mark]
> I am in harmony with the analogy of the intellectual level as being
> something which can be separated.  I would place the analogy of MOQ
> there.  There may be a fifth level if we want to create one.  Are you
> interested in doing so?  I would participate.
> >
> > Personally, I continue to be amazed that recursion scares so many people,
> > but I am convinced it does so because they are trapped in an SOL world.
> They
> > are still looking for a logically flawless, complete system to describe
> > everything, and "all this is just an analogy" continues to elude them. As
> > Goedel and others have show, the more powerful the symbolic system is,
> the
> > more useful it becomes, but also the more unavoidably recursive and
> > paradoxical it becomes. You can't have it both ways. Me, I prefer the
> > beautiful paradox and elegant recursions pointed to so well in
> Margritte's
> > The False Mirror.
>
> [Mark]
> Yes, I agree with you.  We are all trying to find some kind of Truth,
> when all we do is create it.  How can there be endless regression in a
> creation?  It grows outward, not inward.  I am a fan of Goedel.
> >
> >
> >
> > 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/md/archives.html
> >
> 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/md/archives.html
>



-- 
parser