Hi Erin and Gerhard (and Jonathan),
I have been out of the country in the French West Indies and US Virgin
Islands, and have avoided all things electronic for a week or so, so excuse
my late reply.
First, I too was replying to Omar's post as if he was suggesting chaos
instead of order. Indeed, I suspect he was. As is true with many newbies, I
think he felt uncomfortable with the questions that were sent at him, and he
has bailed (correct me if I am wrong Omar). It is inherently risky to invest
time into responding to new members -- they so often flee for whatever
reason. I have still been hoping for a response from new-member, Pirsig
philosophy-teacher Trip, who has suddenly disappeared after a couple of great
posts followed by some probing questions and counters by David and me. Come
back Omar and Trip!
ERIN:
...Anarchy like every other group values something. They seem to value chaos
over
order. While the intellect values order over chaos. As Pirsig says each level
has value in restraining the lower level. I think the fifth level is more of
a neutral level where it does not value chaos or order. Please correct me but
I have a vague memory of someone lecturing entropy as that as you create more
order in one area the remaining area will become more disordered. I imagine
anarchists as having lost faith in order and started new faith in chaos. I
think the fifth level is more neutral attitude and having faith in this
entropy process(rather than chaos or order) where it will all balance out.
ROG:
The someone would probably be Jonathan.
Physicists tend to believe that to create order, you need to export entropy
or disorder. (BTW, some believe the 2nd law of thermodynamics is the Holy
Grail of cosmological physics, a few adventurous others suggest that the
whole thing is taking a good concept of closed systems and misapplying it to
the universe.) The source of energy that funds order on earth (thus allowing
sq) is of course the sun, fueled by gravity fighting against the
electromagnetic force. I am not a proponent (or opponent) of a fifth level,
but I do feel that the four which Pirsig elaborated on all have an organizing
process that creates order, yet that remains open to change. All four levels
do seem to discover a way to harness disorder to experiment with new,
creative advance to DQ.
ERIN:
It was said the success of the US has been due to science. In my experience I
have seen scientists that are more intersested in ego enhancement than in the
truth. They have a confirmation bias in which they are more interested in
promoting their theory than in finding the true theory. I think to be a good
scientist you need to live in uncertainity and thus let a little of that
chaos
in your life.
ROG:
The ability of Western Europeans (not just the US) to harness knowledge is a
process where all scientists agree to certain rules and theoretical models.
They openly share there knowledge, take models further via testing, refine
models based upon anamolies, build tools to test more intricately, use the
new tests to find new anomolies, extend their findings and the model to
related fields etc. The process has proven remarkably successful and
powerful at creating knowledge and enhancing quality. As with all of the
levels, the intellectual one tends to self amplify. Knowledge leads not to
some dead end (hopefully) but to more knowledge. But I agree that
individuals and ego help drive this process. Science, art and technology are
all processes that align bilogical, social and intellectual patterns. It is
this very alignment that makes it so powerful. No one scientist is of much
value -- but together, the selfish individuals are directed to advance
knowledge by being rewarded for vigorously delineating and defending their
own theories and in critiquing others. The net effect is advancement --
progress -- not toward truth, but to high quality (simple, elegant,
consistent, practical, disprovable, informative) intellectual patterns.
Funny, my defense of science sounds much like my defense of free enterprise.
But to FINALLY respond to your point, I too see value in living "on the edge
of chaos". (there are even science fields that espouse this term as
necessary in sustaining living and social patterns). I think your point is
right on target.
ERIN:
I have just finished Tom Robbins 'Fierce Invalids Home From Hot Climates"
which seems to send the message that dilation of ego is the root of the
world's problems. The western world may be attacked as lacking spirituality
which may be true but as a result is the bonus of not taking yourself so
seriously. Part of the success of the western world is due to their sense of
humor, holding multiple viewpoints and thus living in uncertainity. The main
character is very paradoxical and calls himself a neutral angel. The fifth
level to me is paradoxical, allows an appreciation of irony, very neutral,
and
egoless.
ROG:
I LOVE TOM ROBBINS!!! I have read this one twice, with my second reading
being just a month ago. I find more philosophical and inspirational value in
a Robbins novel than in any cultured philosophy book. (believe it or not, I
somehow glossed over the significance of the particular song he sang until
reading your post) Very cool. Everybody should read this book, if for no
other reason than to learn how to live your life two inches off the ground!
ERIN:
Ironically lacking any fixed goals may be the best goal of all
ROG:
Again I agree. Progress -- whatever that is -- isn't toward a fixed goal, it
is toward an undefineable and dynamic goal. But we need to laugh along the
way to stay open to infinite possibility.
GERHARD:
I can understand why a fan of the MoQ can be an anarchist, but I do not
agree in anarchism. I started out not able to understand why a fan of MoQ
could be a Libertarian, but very many members of this list do not agree with
me. In many ways I would say that Libertarianism and Anarchism only differ
in the way they define "Freedom". In libertarianism freedom to own property
are very important, but in anarchism freedom of property ownership are very
important.
ROG:
Again, thanks for the clarification. I see a value in limits to any
uncontrolled source of power. Keeping within the theme of the post, I see
the danger of excessive power to be one of excessive control. Once one group
-- whether governmental, corporate, popular, intellectual, whatever --
assumes control, it is in their interest to keep things as they are. To
suppress dynamic quality. They embrace order and suppress living on the edge
of chaos.
See also my post later today to Jonathan
Rog
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
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 - 16:01:41 BST