[MD] Betternes - 4 levels of!

[X Acto]

dmb says:
> I think you both have a good point and they aren't really mutually exclusive 
>points. I mean, each level of static quality is superior to the one below it 
>precisely because it's more open to improvement. The intellectual level is 
>considered to be superior to the social level because it is less static and more 
>flexible. This upward movement toward greater freedom has its limits too of 
>course. Without static patterns nothing could last and too much freedom leads to 
>degeneracy and devolution. I mean, betterness has its static side too. I'd even 
>say betterness can be applied within the fourth level so that we can weigh the 
>relative merits of opposed intellectual patterns, such as we see in the 
>rejection of SOM in favor of the MOQ. The basic idea that some things are better 
>than others can be applied a million different ways. It guides the painter, the 
>poet, the politician, the philosopher and the scientists. Hell, it guides us in 
>the produce section of the grocery store too. Some
>  philosophies are better than others, some cultures are better than others and 
>some tomatoes are better than others.

Ron:
Hello Dave,
I think thats just about right, I think in a simple pragmatic sense of the 
meaning
it just about covers all the bases as a complex pattern of prefferences, what 
else
 could a static pattern be? 
I'm not quite sure I understand the resistance to the idea of linking the terms
"betterness" with "value" and "Quality" some have.
I mean, I have some idea of the possible reasons one may have in getting
upset of the endeavor of seeking to define, explain and understand that,
which we are told, may not be defineable, explainable or understandable.
It becomes sacred, and as much one defends the purity of the idea.
But is'nt that what all understanding of betterness IS? the endeavor
of  defining, explaining and understanding the dynamic?


Horse said:


>  Hi Dan, Ron, David, Andre et alia

I'll take a wild stab in the dark here and guess that what Ron referred 
to was something that was about on MD several years ago.

Inorganic - Order is better than Chaos
Organic - Alive is better than Dead
Social - Together is better than Alone
Intellectual - Reason is better than Dogma

Each of these expresses an implied reference to the level below as Dave 
points out.

There's probably a 5th idea of betterness as well according to the MoQ - 
Dynamic is better than Static

I've also slapped this into a new thread for convenience.

Ron:
Thanks Horse,
Thats a pretty fair assessment of my aim. I think you are right in that last
statement, which is why I apealed to all to reflect on what exactly that means
to our group. What does it mean to state that Dynamic experience is "better"?
the discussion steming from this inquirey has often gotten heated in the context
of pragmatic truth. It hinted at correspondance theory to some.
The idea that what we mean when we say that something is "true" is what
we mean when we say that it is better, anchors the entire idea that value
is more empirical than scientific materialism.

This brings everything back to Phaedrus, Plato's Phaedrus, the youth
Socrates was trying to persuade that better rhetorical arguements were those
based in philosophy, the love of wisdom. Socrates reasons were that those
who loved wisdom, seek the betterness in experience. The practice of
reflection of the good in life lends greater rhetorical power, because lets face 
it
greater explanitory power, is, greater rhetorical power.

Thank you both for your replies

-Ron