[MD] Energy, Pattern and Value

[rapsncows at fastmail.fm]

Jan-Anders,

On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 15:36:38 +0100, "Jan-Anders" <jananderses at telia.com>
said:
> Tim, I appreciate your honesty.
> 
> I think you're on the way to get it. Here's some more help on the way, 
> please read it slow and loud:
> 
> About Polanyi, The philosopher Immanuel Kant put the same question when 
> he dicussed the table he was standing at. There were no way to find out 
> anything about the table as such "Das Ding an sich" as all we know is 
> just about our own sensations from it.
> But mr Kant could have used the same method as René Descartes. René 
> questioned his own questioning and found that it was impossible and by 
> that way he could say that "I think, therefore I am" (it was obvious 
> that there must *be* a thinking to think about if there was thinking or 
> not.) He put his thinking upon his thinking.

[Tim]
I haven't formally studied philosophy or philosophers.  Here and there I
come across something that seems to be the right thing for the moment. 
This is just to say that I don't know if this next comment of mine will
be worth much, but, this was the finest such explication of that
comment, "I think, therefore I am.", I have found.  Very nice. Thank
you.

> 
> [Jan-Anders] Now back to the table (instead of your chair). What if we put another 
> table upon the first table? If it is possible to put another table upon 
> the first table we can find that this Relation between the tables 
> positively exist. There is a relation that is unbiased from our personal 
> angle. We put a table upon the first and we can let them change place 
> and change the position. We can by that say that the thing on the table, 
> "Das Ding an Tisch" is the evidence for that there is knowledge outside 
> our own perception.

[Tim]
I think these conclusions, however, do not amount to proof.  They
require belief.  now, belief in the solitary, bottom table may be of a
different sort than belief that two such tables can be stacked, but I M.
Polanyi would say that this is still all personal.  I don't know how you
prove objectivity when subjectivity is at the bottom: "I think,
therefore...".  It seems believe, and faithe (a verb form), are
required.

The question then, for me, what is the best way to faithe?  One might
think that one can continually change their faithe as circumstances
require.  I, like you - I think - am drawn to the hope of a faithe that
is valuable in all circumstances.  This, then, would be as close to
proof of the 'objective' as I could 'subjectively' get!  This is where I
am at.  This is my humble opinion.

> 
> [Jan-Anders] This is also the base for Positivism as all that can be measured, e g 
> compared to something else, is real.
> 
> 
> Now about the 4 levels vs the three dichotomies:
> 
> First I would like to point at the dichotomy in ZMM, the 
> romantic-classic. If we consider peoples way of clothing, some people 
> are always following the trend of fashion. Never wearing something 
> outdated and always with their reputation in mind. These are the 
> romantic people while the people in tie and suits (which is an old horse 
> riding dress from the 19th century), the people in suit and tie are 
> representing the perennial values and natural laws that are always the 
> same, these are the classic people.

[Tim]
Jan-Anders, again, let me say something about your examples, by way of
caution.  I think they are too general.  Fashion comes and goes, waxes
and wanes.  Etc. and etc.  I don't know if you put too much stock in the
over-generalizations you present in your examples, but the above is too
confusing, I think, to be very helpful.

> 
> [Jan-Anders] Now imagine a vawe at the bay coming in from the sea.

[Tim]
this I am very excited to do.  I love waves!

> [Jan-Anders] It is moving in a 
> direction towards you and the vawe stretch out in about 90° angle from 
> its direction. In the same way the romantic is oriented to the classic. 
> The romantic are in the actual vawe and the classic are the movement 
> following the direction of it unbiased from the momentual position of 
> the vawe.

[Tim]
If I can join this party - not that I am endorsing the geometry of the
example though - only by faithe can you find your way to the curl of the
breaking wave: where the romantic and classic are properly in tune.  But
I am being very liberal in my speech now: sometimes it is nice to be
caught inside, other times you like to be on the shoulder, other times,
still, you want to be outside, sometimes it is best on the shore, etc.

> 
> [Jan-Anders] For a refresh of RMP's definition see ch. 11-12 in Lila.

[Tim]
thanks a lot for pinpointing this; unfortunately Lila is back at the
library.

>[Jan-Anders] As you can see 
> in his writing about the 4 levels there is a clear timeline in it. It 
> starts somewhere just after big bang, where most of the atoms and 
> particles got their constitution or pattern and then the biological and 
> the social patterns have evolved as a result of the dynamic quality. 
> Today we can see the intellectual level rise (since about ancient greece 
> or something) and how the conflict between victorian decency and 
> intellectual frenecy spread even into MD.

[Tim]
well, I don't like this idea that the intellectual level is so new. 
And, if you buy into the objectivity of certain things like chairs and
tables, then wouldn't there have had to be thinking way way way back, at
the beginning?

> 
> [Jan-Anders] We have to deal with an evolution that, like a vawe from the beginning 
> to the future, is both romantic and classic. The classic is what we see 
> as following perennial laws of function and logic while the romantic has 
> to consider what's really going on and true at the moment. The actual 
> state now is just between the past and the future and is by this forum 
> called The Quality. Our perceptions is always a short moment after as it 
> takes some time to get what it is.

[Tim]
okay, this seems pretty good to me.  At least it makes me think that you
don't put too much stock in the examples, but in something that you see
when giving them - but which is really hard for me as the reader to
abstract.  (btw, the normal spelling is 'wave', don't know if it is a
typo...)

> 
> [Jan-Anders] In the same manner as romantic and classic is oriented 90° to each 
> other, energy, pattern and value is oriented to each other making a 
> 3D-vawe,

[Tim]
this is a very intriguing idea.  I don't know if I see what you mean any
more clearly than when I broached the question first, but...  Why is it
not three interconnected, 3D-vawes?

>[Jan-Anders] an x,y,z.t-system glome or just a bubble of time.

[Tim[
I like the sound of the word 'glome', but I can't picture it.  And, I am
really hesitant to try an say much about the nature of time.

>[Jan-Anders] Out from 
> origo is the three dichotomies oriented and thus making up the classic 
> in three dimensions with the actual now as the vawe where the romantic 
> covers the whole ball of fashion. The 4 levels can be found as shells 
> inside the hypersphere as we know that all evolution takes energy and 
> has its patterns and value for other events.

[Tim]
I would like to know what leap(s) of faithe you have had to make to get
even to Energy, pattern, and value.  Do you just assume the a priori,
axiomatically?

> 
> [Jan-Anders] This is the nature of the reality and the quality. RMP stated that 
> Quality couldn't be defined but we know that it IS, CHANGES and has 
> VALUE.

[Tim]
this seems very similar to my fundament too, but for one thing.  I think
an aspect of UNKNOWN must be carried along.  (Faithe...)

>[Jan-Anders] Anything there is, have some energy, pattern and value.

[Tim]
and is shrouded in the unknown?

>[Jan-Anders] Every 
> event and process can be dividied into smaller pieces with its energy, 
> pattern and value and can also be joined togheter with other in bigger 
> and more complex processes. The actual state of any process emanating as 
> a sphere of time out from its beginning. Like a sound vawe from a 
> raindrop that hits a leave in the forest. All events together as the 
> white noise from rain.

[Tim]
Unknown too?

> 
> [Jan-Anders] The inorganic found their pattern inside the periodic system of balanced 
> states as "tones of energy" following the script of "the big note".

[Tim]
what is this 'the big note'?  is there something of belief here?

> [Jan-Anders] The 
> organic finds it's patterns by mutations and masscopying preparing for 
> the next step to survive. The social level finds its patterns by 
> interacting, art and by collecting time. The intellectual level finds it 
> patterns by thinking and using internet.

[Tim]
again, I do not like the examples/generalizations.

> 
>[Jan-Anders] We as humans can choose to be passive or active.

[Tim]
beautiful!!  ... To me at least.

> [Jan-Anders] We can make pictures of 
> events and processes not only how they look but also how the move and 
> evolve. We can make tools to Change a process to benefit from it. The 
> unconscious processes like organics and animals change themselves by 
> mutations and luck but we can make concepts by our experiences and 
> choose strategy, e. g. smile in public to cover a secret social 
> strategy.

[Tim]
One, I give animals way more credit than mere luck.  Two: yes, humans
are quite good at taking our advantage and turning it into a
disadvantage.  Cynicism...

> [Jan-Anders] Reasonability is a strategy you can choose. We act in time. We 
> measure, abstract and valuate. We add, subtract, analyze and calculate 
> and react on the surrounding to rise our own quality. We don't have to 
> wait for a mutated person to do it. We are also conscious about that we 
> are conscious and are able to change our own consciousness to get more 
> out of the situation.

[Tim]
It seems my cats, when I used to have cats, could do all this too.  It
is a matter of degree only, so it seems to me.  I am willing to bet that
if you talk to people who rehabilitate abused animals, you would be
convinced that they too can change their consciousnesses.

> 
> [Jan-Anders] As long as any process is well balanced by its energy, pattern and value 
> it will continue. When the division between the Dynamic quality (how it 
> really is) and the Static quality (how it should be) is 1 then the 
> Quality is best (Nirvana). But any difference from 1 in any of the three 
> will produce a force and a counterforce. When it is under 0,5 the the 
> forces aiming to 0 will take over and the event will cease to exist.

[Tim]
uuuuuuuhmhmhmhmhm... maybe let me know what you think of incorporating
the *Unknown* with energy, pattern, and value first.

> 
> [Jan-Anders] Too fat, too weird or too boring will kill any one. Any enterprise with 
> a balance by its liquidity, its cash-flow and its marketing account will 
> survive. Any nation with a social economy, a fair justice and cultural 
> freedom will perish. Liberté, égalité, fraternité (cultural freedom, 
> juridical equality and brothership in economy).

[Tim]
'perish'? 'with'?  Did you mean with/flourish?  without/perish?  Anyway,
on the other note, even these example might be (way) too rough, depends
what you mean maybe.  By certain conceptions, 'social economy' could be
considered incommensurate with 'cultural freedom'.  But this is a whole
other boat.  Fair justice I am behind!

> 
> [Jan-Anders] Any philosophy that has followers and a manual that can be used by any 
> waitress or motorcycle mechanic will outlive every religion.
> 
> Jan-Anders


[Tim]
well, I might say that the most important stuff seems to be, and I think
it should be, stuff that is accessible to everyone.

Thanks,
and all the best,
Tim
-- 
  
  rapsncows at fastmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class