[MD] Capitalism: my experience

[John Carl]

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 8:22 AM, <skutvik at online.no> wrote:

I can only counter: How does the MOQ account for the 1st. level being
> inorganic value ...etc upwards. All levels are patterns of value and this
> cannot be accounted for, but starts with the Quality=Reality postulate.
> We usually must start at square one with newbies, but with a veteran
> like Ron and John ..phew.
>
> John adds:
>
> > how does life emerge from matter?
>
> The MOQ only says that DQ was the "midwife" and as such it
> combines creationism and Darwinism. Wouldn't it be an idea to read
> the f..ing  "manual"?
>
> > how does intellect emerge from groups?
>
> It emerges from the SOCIAL LEVEL, nothing about groups. and its
> emergence is told in ZAMM.
>
>

Very well, what is a social level and how does intellect "arise" from it.
 By what mechanism does a social level create intellectual patterns?

If you say people come together and create new intellectual patterns in
conversation, I'd agree with you, but point out that it is always based upon
pre-existing intellectual patterns in those people and among those groups.


> > how do higher patterns emerge from lower?
>
> If you ask for a "scientific" explanation you ask for an intellectual
> (level)
> explanation and THAT would not be a MOQ explanation.
>
>

All explanations are quality explanations in that they're explanations of
quality.  Some explanations are better than others. Quality is indefinable
is because it is infinite.  Of any particular instantiation of high quailty,
we can always do or imagine better or just ask the question, "is it good?"
thus demonstrating belief or faith in a higher contextual level which makes
sense of such questions.

This is how intellect points to Quality without capturing it.  Because
intellectual patterns, Objectivism writ large, are infinitely unbounded in
the same way.  "Many analogies" precludes no single other analogies except
those analogies that preclude all others!

Being inclusive of analogies means analogizing is an infinite activity - you
can't come to the end of it and say, "here" this is where it stops.

Two parts of the tree you can't whittle with your analytic knife - the heart
and the growing tip.





> > Makes more sense to me that its a top down evolution, all the way,
> > through and through.
>
> Ron is plain dense you are solid wood from ear to ear. With adherers
> like this will the MOQ ever need critics?
>
> Bodvar
>

Do you mean MoQ as an intellectual pattern?  Or a social-level one?  Or do
you believe that intellectual excellence is always recognized and achieves
social recognition "naturally", and thus there is no reason to think about
the distinction?


Wooden John the wonderer

(although most of it is curly shavings, trapped in my hair and beard)