virus: Level 3

Reed Konsler (konsler@ascat.harvard.edu)
Wed, 26 Feb 1997 19:20:14 -0500

>From: Richard Brodie <RBrodie@brodietech.com>
>Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 23:12:01 -0800
>Subject: RE: virus: The Greeks would be Geeks
>
>Reed wrote:
>
>>Now, Richard, I don't agree with my understanding of level 3 becuase it
>>seems to me like a sort of respite from the quest for the holy grail...a
>>place where you can be satisfied. But maybe I'm misinterpreting. Most
>>of my questions, I think, are not intended to attack you level ideas but
>>to define them. I will not join a bunch of self-satisfied slackers.
>
>What clarity! "I don't agree with my understanding of..." If only we all
>realized that any time we criticize, what we are criticizing is OUR OWN
>UNDERSTANDING!
>
>Anyway, rest assured (ha) that Level 3 is JUST THE BEGINNING...!
_________________________________________________________

Thanks, but you've ignored the question. To paraphrase J.R. "Bob" Dobbs
and the Church of the SubGenius (which is--tounge in check--a lot like
this list) "The trouble with enlightment is, if you think you've got it then
you don't have it." This alludes to what makes me uneasy. Are you on
"Level 3" now? Do you stay there? Is "Level-behavior" context dependent?

If Level 3 thinking is beyond "memes" of what is it composed...or does it
have no structure? How do you know you aren't merely infected with a
mind virus that has adapted to your discriminators so well that it mimics
your mental immune system...and is thus invisible?

Can you describe a situation in which Level 3 thinking is required for
survival...or one it which there is an obvious and dramatic advantage...
or is this more of a philosophical issue?

If you aren't interested in answering these questions I'll stop asking them.

Reed

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Reed Konsler konsler@ascat.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------