Wed, 3 Dec 1997 03:06:20 +0100
> From: Diana McPartlin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: Multiple recipients of <email@example.com>
> Subject: LS Principles of the MoQ
> Date: Tuesday, December 02, 1997 11:29 AM
> Hi everyone
> I've said this before, but I'll say it again because the message didn't
> seem to get through. The way I see it, there is a need for the Lila
> Squad members to establish amongst ourselves what the MoQ is and is not.
> This is not the same thing as a FAQ. Earlier I called it a catechism,
> this name wasn't popular and principles (well principia actually) was
> suggested. I find that acceptable so I've called it principles instead
> of catechism. The point, however, remains the same.
> It is by forcing ourselves to state what we think that we force
> ourselves to examine what we think. This is the reason for writing
> A FAQ on the other hand is primarily aimed at newbies. It's purpose is
> to explain and illustrate the MoQ for those who are unfamiliar with it.
> It should be written in a casual and approachable manner. It should be
> clear and comprehensive. Every statement should be backed up with
> evidence and example. It is a useful and needed document. But I totally
> fail to see how we can write a FAQ of something when we don't understand
> it ourselves, therefore I think the principles must come first.
> In my efforts to distil the essence of the MoQ, I've found that in fact
> there isn't much to it. There's the idea of Quality, the dynamic-static
> split, the four levels and their relationships, the codes of morality
> and that's pretty much it. Of course you can go on forever explaining
> and applying these principles, but in its essence the MoQ is very
> The principles below are a work in progress. No doubt they will need to
> be reworded and perhaps a few more added on. But, for what it's worth
> here they are:
> 1. The Quality principle
> Quality is the fundamental nature of reality. Quality is morality,
> goodness, rightness, value, experience, sensation, awareness,
> consciousness and the Self.
> 2. The Dynamic-static split
> The best way to split Quality is into dynamic and static quality.
> Dynamic quality is experienced as freedom, newness, excellence, fun,
> beauty. Static quality is experienced as structure, normality, apathy,
> 3. The four static levels
> There are four discrete types of static value: inorganic, biological,
> social and intellectual. These are experienced as patterns of physical
> matter, life, culture and thought, respectively.
> 4. Static conflict
> Each static level sees itself as the highest good and tries to dominate
> the others.
> 5. Static dependency
> Although the higher levels constantly try to break free from the lower
> ones they are also dependent on them and should not destroy them
> 6. The hierarchy of morality
> The purpose of all Quality is to do what is moral and the order of
> morality from lowest to highest is inorganic, biological, social,
> intellectual and Dynamic. The static levels also exhibit low quality and
> high quality patterns within themselves.
> Ultimately I hope to refine this set of principles so that it can be
> drawn upon to answer every question about the MoQ.
> For example the question about the intellectual level's destruction of
> the environment can be answered by the static dependency principle and
> the hierarchy of morality: Yes intellectual value is more moral, but no
> it doesn't have the right to destroy the levels beneath it.
> Sino-US relations can be explained first by the four static levels - one
> country is ruled by the social level the other by the intellectual
> level. Second by the static conflict principle - each country genuinely
> feels that it is right. Third by the hierarchy of morality -- the
> intellectual level is, in fact, more right than the social level. And
> fourth, the whole result is moderated by the static dependency principle
> which says that the intellectual level can change but not destroy.
> The AI question is answered by the Quality principle and by the four
> levels. Quality is awareness, a computer is inorganic awareness and
> human intelligence is intellectual awareness. They are two discrete
> things. (okay, okay, I'm not presenting this as the last word on AI,
> only trying to show how the principles can be applied).
> I could give more examples, but I think you get the picture. As I said,
> I don't in anyway consider this a finished set of principles and I
> welcome constructive criticism.
> Thanks for reading
> post message - mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
> unsubscribe/queries - mailto:email@example.com
> homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
Ken Clark here. I am relatively new in the squad and am still struggling
with the principles of the MOQ. Whatever you do with the principles will
suit me just fine. I trust you implicitly.
I had to smile at the sheer Britishness, or perhaps Scottishness, of your
answer in the FAQ about 'Does Lila Have Quality'. Right on old girl!
-- post message - mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org unsubscribe/queries - mailto:email@example.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:25 CEST