[MD] 4 Mark - corrected.

[118]

Hi Marsha,

Thank you.

Believe me; I am fully aware of what you are presenting.  My posts to you
are directed towards what this "hypothetical” leads to in terms of your
awareness.  I am fully in agreement in terms of human arrogance.  MOQ
rectifies this by putting Quality as the first assumption.


In the past I have presented the concept that: patterns are what we
create.  Such patterns do not exist in and of themselves.  Knowledge is one
example of these patterns.  That we create them does not fall within the
bounds of the hypothetical.  The hypothetical implies that there is a True
pattern.  When we build a house, the intention is not to approximate some
underlying truth (at least for many of us, although Plato would
disagree).  We build a house to have something to live in.  Metaphysics is
no different.


I believe that the nature of knowledge (as a creation, rather than a
search) should be taught at early levels beginning in primary school.  This
would stimulate the creative spirit we all have.  We, here in the forum,
are high school graduates (hopefully).  We can even consider ourselves to
be doing graduate work in MOQ.  What you present in terms of the
hypothetical is a basis to move forward with.  The graduate work involves
building on this hypothetical premise and seeing where it leads in terms of
MOQ.  This is the subject on which I am always questioning you.  That you
see everything as "not necessarily true" is fine, but how do you proceed
from there in a philosophical manner?



I am happy that you find uncertainty in what you see, as enlightening to
you.  But that is just a start.  This is metaphysics, which is the building
of a view which others can share in.  Let us move on from you initial
assumption and do some metaphysics, shall we?



I would like to learn more about how seeing the world as Value leads to
"expanded rationality".  Perhaps you can expand on that concept since I am
not quite sure what you mean.  So far as I can tell, rationality does
nothing but expand as we build it.  Are you speaking of a different kind of
rationality, such as spiritual rationality?  If so, then we can discuss
this in honest and trusting dialogue.



I find you to be a breath of fresh air in a sometimes arrogant dogmatic
presentation of MOQ.



Cheers,

Mark

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:09 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:


Correction...  Should be:


I find it more useful to consider objects of knowledge (stuff in the
encyclopedia) as 'static patterns of value' ("patterns") rather than
'truths'.  I think the term 'patterns' is a good representation.

I prefer to think of patterns as hypothetical (supposed but not necessarily
real or true.)   Once one accepts the MoQ's fundamental principal that the
world is nothing but Value, then 'expanded rationality' occurs when an
individual transforms the natural tendency to reify self and world into the
natural tendency to hold all static patterns of value to be hypothetical
(supposed but not necessarily real or true.)  By using 'hypothetical' I
think there is less of a tendency toward intellectual arrogance.
 Understanding static (patterned) value as hypothetical acknowledges the
incompleteness of what we know and makes room for additional inquiry with
new possibilities; it promotes an attitude of fearless curiosity: gumption.
 It moves one away from thinking of entities as existing inherently and
independent of consciousness.




Marsha


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