[MD] Free Will

[X Acto]

Andre,



----- Original Message ----
From: Andre Broersen <andrebroersen at gmail.com>
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Sent: Sat, April 23, 2011 4:00:36 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Free Will

Ron previously to Andre:

Pragmatically Andre, DQ being understood as undefined betterness is more useful 
than insisting that it remain unconceptualized.

Andre then:

Yes and no Ron. I sympathize with Pirsig when he argues that we should keep all
concepts out of DQ. 'Concepts are always static. Once they get into dynamic
Quality they'll overrun it and try to present it as some kind of concept 
itself'( Anthony's PhD, p 35).

Andre now:
And I should have added:
'So what Phaedrus was saying was that not just life, but everything, is an 
ethical activity. It is nothing else. When inorganic patterns of reality create 
life the Metaphysics of Quality postulates that they've done so because it is 
'better' and that this definition of 'betterness'- this beginning response to 
Dynamic Quality- is an elementary unit of ethics upon which all right and wrong 
can be based.(LILA, p 161)

I take this to mean that 'betterness' can be defined as a 'beginning response to 
DQ', a 'loosening', a 'weakening', 'challenging' or sometimes having a possible 
'disintegrating' effect on static patterns of value. The rightness or wrongness 
is either considered immediately or centuries later. Seems to me that this ties 
our views together quite nicely Ron: DQ remains unconceptualized and be 
considered undefined betterness. The 'elementary unit of ethics' is based on 
'this beginning response' to DQ and not on DQ itself.

Does this sound okay to you?

Ron:
I think it ties everything together in a continious system of thought yet leaves 
it open ended to 

change. It has meaning yet remains an undefined meaning. 

When we discuss DQ we must conceptualize a meaning, It bears the most fruit and 
supplies
the greatest explanation as betterness but it comes with the caveat that it is 
an undefined
betterness.
It solves the problem of relativism, yes, there are many truths, but some truths 
are better than others.

It is the elementary unit of ethics on which all reality rests apon. This has 
huge consequences
over Nihlism over no choice and relativistic meaninglessness.

Thus, from an MoQ perspective, "betterness" is the elementary unit of meaning of 
all static
patterns of value migrating towards DQ. We may not say or know anything else 
about DQ,
DQ from a static perspective is therefore undefined betterness.

As this relates to Aristotle and Socrates, Dialectic reduced concepts to 
relativistic meaninglessness.
Aristotle stated that it ignored the good, that from the good all meaning 
springs. 


Thnx for taking up the conversation Andre, I feel it is an important one for the 
discuss.










Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html