[MD] Levels in electronic computers

[Krimel]

> [Krimel]
> DQ is not a force. It is not something that effects anything at all. It is
a
> way of describing the effect of any number of forces that do have effects.

[Magnus]
I didn't say it was a force, but it definitely affect events. Without 
it, everything would be static and dead.

[Krimel]
So what is it then? You say it has effects. As a "cause" is must be
something. But no it is not it is a way of thinking about and describing all
manner of things that do produce change.

> [Krimel]
> I don't think "survival" is a meaningful term outside of the context of
> biology. Nor do I think biology is an agent.

[Magnus]
I do, and I do.

[Krimel]
Ok, I think you are wrong on both counts.

> [Magnus]
> But I just said it does offer something substantial. And I bother
> because I care about the MoQ, and I'm trying to save it from being
> transformed into something ludicrous by the hardheaded and clueless.
>
> [Krimel]
> Ok then my questions is what? I would add, why?

[Magnus]
As I said before:

incorporated in the MoQ, with the other levels and the discreteness and 
dependence, I think it *is* quite a step forward.

What do you mean "why"?

[Krimel]
To the event that it relies on this arbitrary construction of levels I don't
see that part of the MoQ as having much to offer. Its levels are not
discrete. I see no way of making them discrete and the only reason I can see
that it matters is that Pirsig claims they are discrete which makes in
gospel is some circles.

I mean by why, if there are other ways of thinking about these issue,
systems theory for example what is the value of trying to hammer the MoQ
into something that approximates what these other views already accomplish;
particularly in view of the transformation of consciousness already effected
by say, systems theory?