Robert Duinker wrote:
I think in this post you are confusing ideas with the brain. Ideas are
created by the brain, but they are not the same thing
AB: Maybe my confusion resides in the definition of an idea. I feel quite
confident that information exists outside of the human brain. However,
Information processed by the brain creates ideas. The biological brain creates
a template from which ideas develop and thus the intellectual level emerges.
Rob:
The intellectual level means a system of values that places truth and ideas as
the most
important thing, even above society, when societal values put the survival
of the societal system above everything else.
AB: This seems to be what Pirsig has done. However, this is only an idea of
his. Once shared in Lila, it has manifested itself as the MoQ which resides on
the level of society. Thus -- this disscussion group. "Most important" may be
the dynamic qualtiy which he speaks of. But, creating an arbitrary category
called "intellectual" that resides above society assumes that society doesn't
possess a dynamic quality of it's own.
Rob:
That why it is worse,
because social values are blind to new ideas that will benefit society
because they will change it.
AB: Why is this so? Society seems perfectly capable of evolving without any
design whatsoever. "Good"social values are the ones that have the greatest
fitness and survive, while "bad" social values prove least fit and don't get
passed on.
Rob:
Think of Galileo, what is better, conforming to
the society at the time, or telling the world that the earth goes around the
sun?
AB: This proves my point. The intellectual resided in Galileo's brain. He
produced an idea. After a struggle with the social values of the time this idea
won out. But this struggle occurred on the level of society.
Rob:
MOQ says the latter. That's intellect over society.
AB: To me, this is a better example of dynamic quality. I think Pirsig's idea
of a level called "intellectual values" that resides above "Social values" is an
idea in his brain that will not survive. He does offer some great insight on
static and dynamic quality that may be equated to "truth," and as a modern
philosepher many of his other ideas may survive. But, for the MOQ to become a
useful theory, I think it needs some revision on Pirsig's "hierarchy of values."
Regards,
Andy
>
>
>
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 - 16:01:45 BST