Hi Marco:
A while ago you wrote:
> I don't know, maybe Platt could describe evolution of the Static
> levels from the perspective of aesthetics.....?
With the recent talk about religion and spirit, I was reminded of
something I read: "Science explains the higher by the lower; religion
explains the lower by the higher." Further, our old friend Ken Wilber
speaks of "devolution" or "involution," whereby each and every moment
we collapse from absolute spirit to our present state of being. From
Paul Davies comes the question, "If beauty is entirely programmed,
selected for its survival value alone, it is all the more surprising to see
it re-emerge in the esoteric world of fundamental physics which has
not direct connection to biology." Finally, there is Plato's perfect forms
outside the cave we inhabit.
So I'm thinking that the levels may not have evolved in the sense of a
series of static latches left behind by DQ, but that DQ created the levels
all at once. At birth we are the embodiment of DQ, but as we grow we
slip down the hierarchy to lower levels of quality and spend the rest of
our lives trying to regain the purity and beauty from whence we came.
Art, religion and books like LILA draw us toward that goal.
By thus proposing the levels didn't evolve over time, I neatly sidestep
your question about how aesthetics might have affected the evolution
of the levels. Which really means I don't have an answer in line with the
MOQ. Still, I haven't given up. I'm determined to put it all together
somehow. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Platt
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 - 16:01:50 BST