[MD] Babylonian intellectuals

[Magnus Berg]

Hi Andy

On 2010-07-18 22:46, Andy Skelton wrote:
> None of us ever in our lives complete the work of defining any one of
> the levels. It is a fool's errand. No, I'm not calling you foolish
> personally. Only your current activity. Don't recant or apologize; the
> social ledger need not balance here. I just hope you find a better way
> to apply your intellect.
>
> To properly condemn what you're doing I feel I should name it. So I'll
> call it Definism. I don't know what to call my position.

I'm on that same errand but following a different path, and I thought 
you were too last week. Did something change or am I mistaken to have 
thought so?

You wrote a few days ago, about the MoQ generally but the levels are 
included, so I guess you meant them as well:

"When you need it, give it a
sharp form and use it to slice through the world and then let it
dissolve back out of existence for the next time."

So, my question becomes: How can you give it a sharp form whenever you 
happen to need it if you don't know, at least subconsciously, what the 
levels are?

Or to be more precise. I can imagine that it might be futile to define 
the levels in our physical stack using very specific physical terms such 
as gravity and space, or chemical terms such as ionic bonding and such. 
The reason it might be futile is because those terms doesn't exist in 
other stacks, such as a virtual environment in a computer where we want 
to characterize computer viruses. Then we can't start reasoning in terms 
of gravity, space or ionic bonds because none of that exists there.

But heck Andy, why just give up and not even try?

Back out for a moment then. See what's different in the two stacks with 
regards to the viruses, but more importantly, see what stays the same. 
There you must find that indeterminate you subconsciously can use to 
give the levels that "sharp form" when you need them.

	Magnus