[MD] The MOQ difference

[Andre Broersen]

  Ham to Mark:

Generally I don't use physics to support metaphysics, nor is it good
practice.

Andre:
How can one make any metaphysical statement not based on the physical sciences Ham? I would have thought
it good practice, sound practice, solid practice to make any philosophy verifiable (along the rigours of
scientific investigation).Northrop has spent quite a few pages on the relationship between both endeavors
(the latter deriving from the 'results' of the former) and, indeed, attributing the shortcomings (and blatant
blunders of the latter) on the misinterpretations/mistakes of the former.(many of these having come to light
through subsequent scientific investigations/discoveries, where philosophical/metaphysical re-interpretations
have lagged behind)...until radical empiricism began to be properly argued for. Perhaps they could mutually
affirm,inform,correct and guide eachother in a DQ/sq relationship.
Perhaps I misunderstand your meaning?

Ham:
Mark, I too have wrestled with the Quality concept, as quality (like all
relative judgments) requires the sensibility of an observer.  To the degree
that evolution generates species better fitted to their environment, I
suppose one can say, euphemistically, that it is "governed by quality".

Andre:
Here you seem to be positing, once again, a dichotomy, an opposition, between observer and that which is
observed, between the species and the 'fitted to their environment'. The one arises out of the other and the
the other arises out of the one.(successfully or not)

Ham:
But if evolution is a directed process with a "final goal", the proper term is Teleology.
And teleology implies a Designer whose unknown objective is part of the enigma.

Andre:
I think that the MOQ suggests that it is not a 'directed' process. The MOQ shows that 'there is a tendency
...in the universe for life to improve its situation where possible but this improvement is not pre-determined
by physical laws nor consciously directed by a God towards a pre-set defined purpose or end'.
(Anthony's PhD, p 92).