[MD] kill all intellectual patterns

[118]

Hi J-A,
Thank you for your response.  You have an interesting opinion on the levels.

In my opinion, the levels are like floors in a building where things
happen.  There is of course communication between floors and some
commonality.

However, you have not given any reason why the presentation of levels is
important towards describing Quality.  You can have opinions what the
levels are, but that is not what I was asking.

Given that awareness as Quality is really something that should be sought,
how is it that the levels provide this?  That is what I am asking.  Why
levels?  Perhaps you can address this, if you have an opinion about it.

On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Jan Anders Andersson <jananderses at telia.com
> wrote:

> Hi Mark
>
> If you read my book "Money and the Art of Losing Control" thoroughly you
> should know very well why it is so important to understand the difference
> between the levels.
>
> Truth is an intellectual pattern. Oh, please believe me, or who cares?
>

Comment:  This sounds like dogma to me.  I am fine to consider truth to be
an intellectual pattern and that such a statement is an intellectual
pattern.  So we have an intellectual pattern giving rise to another
intellectual pattern, and in this way we remove truth from the equation.
 So let's forget about truth, let us just stick to the term intellectual
pattern if that is indeed what truth is.  It seems to me that you are
bringing additional baggage to the term "truth", and I wonder what that is.
 Is it possible that truth is actually outside an intellectual pattern?
 Can it exist outside of the web of reason?  Something to think about.

>
> Grief is a socially based emotion, just because we need each other.
>

Comment: It seems you are defining social in terms of group behavior.  This
is fine.  However, this is not the social level, but a result of the social
level.  Like I said, the social level is a place where things happen, that
is why it is called a level.  One of these things is one person needing
another.  Another is the expression of personal grief for the passing of a
loved one.  However, you statement does not touch on the purpose of such
level.  That is what I am after.

>
> Everyonce you fall asleep, you're returning to the forces of the
> biological level. It's so sweet...
>

Comment:  So far as I can tell, we are always under the forces of the
biological level.  It is the biological level that provides us with our
intellect.  Without nerves firing, there would be no intellect.  The
intellect is one manifestation of the biological level, like a fruit on a
tree.  We can never be free of the biological level therefore we can never
return to it.  What you are speaking of is the cessation of thought as
intention.  This is simply the stopping of directed thinking.  This can be
considered as something which happens in the intellectual level.  So in my
opinion you are not pointing to the biological level at all with your
statement.  Again, it takes a good understanding of what these levels mean
and why they were presented in aid of describing Quality.

>
> Something that dies, returns to the physical level.
>

Comment:  Again, we cannot escape the physical level.  Life can be
considered as one manifestation of the physical level.  The physical level
is with us when we are alive.  Here you are pointing to consciousness.
 With that in mind, how would you describe consciousness using the level
analogy?

>
> A society's power is based on cooperation by people with different
> abilities, while the strength of biological species is based on
> specialization and massreproduction to overcome individual failures.
>

Comment:  This sounds like something derived from the intellectual level.
 It gives the impression that the intellectual level can dominate the other
levels, which is, of course, the arrogant ego.  What you term as "society"
does not come from the social level, but a concept from the intellectual
level.  The same can be said for your dictum of specialization and such.
 These are intellectual constructs and therefore reside in the intellectual
level.  Besides, I think that Darwinism is far from adequate to explain the
human condition.  But that is my opinion.  Darwinism can be enlightening,
but more often it results in evil.  What kind of world is it that requires
we do battle with each other?  This sounds like the ancient Jews and
their Yahweh.  Yes, nature is a punishing God according to them.  I thought
we had got beyond that, but yet here we are again, trying to part the Red
Sea.

>
> The strength of a chemical or physical pattern is based on mathematical
> perfection, statistical and repetitive procedures.
>

Comment: Yes, math is used to describe such things and can be useful.
 Mathematics is a creation of man, and can therefore never be perfect
unless you think a mathematician is perfect.  You point to the scientific
method and I wonder how much you know about it.  Did you know that the same
set of data can be interpreted into conflicting model's?  Did you know that
science is provisional until a better idea comes forth?  Did you know that
statistic is used when we cannot say anything about the individual.  While
we can predict where things will go statistically, it is much harder to
predict where an individual will go.  Statistic falls apart at the
specific.  Statistic is a generality that has little to do with a single
event.  It is afterthought, and not predictive to the individual.

>
> It's all based on change, change is the main issue when we discuss
> Quality. How can we change something to be better?
> If we really care, we just have to learn as much as we can about the
> levels. It is totally dumb to arrange a birthdayparty or a wedding
> following the rules of the biological level, isn't it? Social behaviour is
> mandatory at any discussion forum.
>

Comment: Yes, I like this.  However, I would use a different term from
change.  I would use "creativity".  The levels are based on creativity.
 How can we create something better?  Remember that your interpretation of
the levels is from the intellectual side of things.  An atom could care
less about what you are thinking, while we care much more about what an
atom is doing.

The rules of the biological level that you refer to are intellectual rules,
not biological ones.  Don't confuse the levels.  As I see it, we can
describe the levels as a pyramid where each level gets smaller and more
specialized.  With a pyramid, the base is the most important and directs
how the other levels are expressed.

I agree that a certain social etiquette is mandatory in any discussion
forum.  Hopefully those with antagonistic tendencies will leave one by one.
 I am tired of all this name calling.  What ever happened to civil
discussion?

Thank you for providing something I can opine about.  I do not intend to be
"right" about these things.

>
> Und so weiter...
>
> Mark
>
> 30 nov 2012 kl. 23:39 skrev 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com>:
>
> > Why are the levels important in understanding Quality?
> >
> >
> >
> > Is this not worthy of discussion?  Is this not a fundamental question?  I
> > am sure many have much better answers than I do.
> 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
>