[MD] Re Arlo

[skutvik at online.no]

Horse

You wrote to Platt
> Could you explain this further Platt as I'm not sure what you mean by
> the Intellectual Level being a subset of the MoQ.

Isn't it clear to you what Platt mean by  the 4th. level being a MOQ 
subset or property? This is probably the stumbling stone for all you 
Buchanans, believing that SOM's intellect - thinking itself or MIND - 
goes on as MOQ's 4th. static level. No wonder you have problems. 
See below for Arlo.

[Arlo] butted in
> Of course, by this reasoning, any "metaphysics" that talks about
> "intellect" creates a "new level" as it can't possibly contain itself.

How many metaphysics like the MOQ, with a DQ/SQ divide and a 
static level hierarchy with "intellect" the topmost level, have you 
encountered? Sounds like your library is choke full. 

> Or, a bit simpler, it says that "no intellectual pattern can be a
> description of the intellectual level", so ALL descriptions of
> "intellect" become an emergent "higher-level" than the intellect they
> describe.

This describes SOM's paradox pretty well. It (SOM) proposes that its 
intellect  - or subjective mind - observes and describes objective 
reality, but from its premises one either ends in idealism (all is mind) or 
materialism (all is matter) The MOQ resolves this platypus by 
abolishing the mind/matter distinction as fundamental, only valid on the 
static 4th level. You did not know that the 4th. level has nothing to do 
with SOM's mind,  did you? 

Bodvar