Rick wrote:
As I have always understood it, the "chaos" that sits below the
inorganic level is a sort of pure or "unpatterned DQ"--- the sea of DQ in
which the island of SQ resides and arises from. But I have recently been
wondering if this doesn't create a problem.
For if that chaotic "level" is equal to DQ itself then there is a clash
in the moral codes. For one code establishes "the supremacy of DQ over SQ"
and another establishes "the supremacy of the inorganic over the chaotic".
But if the inorganic level is pure DQ then this second code might as well
"establish the supremacy of the inorganic over DQ"--- I'm sure I don't have
to list the many problems that this creates for the system, and I know there
must be a problem in my understanding of the "chaotic". So I guess I'm
asking two questions: (1) If DQ always morally "beats" SQ, and if the
chaotic is pure DQ, then how can the Inorganic ever morally triumph over the
Chaotic?
(2) If the chaotic "level" doesn't equal pure, unpatterned DQ--- then what's
the difference???
My response:
Great questions. I have long recognized this problem, but I think I may
have a solution.
You make the assumption that what proceeded the inorganic level was chaos,
and that seems to be fairly intuitive. But I would contend that this is
actually flawed intuition. I think it would be more accurate to say that
what proceeded the inorganic level was not chaos, but order, absolute order.
Indeed, this seems to be supported be science. The entropy before the big
bang was actually zero. There was no chaos at all. All matter and energy
was contained within an infinitesimal space.
What's even better, though, is that when we alter this basic assumption,
everything else falls into place. The creation of inorganic order out of
what we can call primordial order is not a victory over Dynamic Quality at
all. It's the very first victory OF Dynamic Quality! The level of absolute
order in reality went down (as it does at the development of each new
stage), but the QUALITY of that order went up. My take on the whole issue
of Dynamic Quality is that, quantitatively, it decreases order, but
qualitatively, it increases it. (Of course, TOO much DQ can actually
qualitatively LOWER order, as in the case of the character of Lila, who at
one point Phaedrus says needs some "static latching," but in most cases it
is a good thing.)
The whole reason that DQ is so great is that it allows for improvement and
the development of BETTER order/value (the basic "stuff" that reality is
composed of).
- Matt
_______________________________________________________
Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite
Visit http://freeworld.excite.com
------- End of forwarded message -------
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:39 BST