Dear Scott,
Thanks for your 16/8 20:53 +0000 answer on my 16/8 7:55 +0200 questions:
'Is DQ in your scheme still a subdivision of Quality as in the MoQ?
Is the DQ that observes/evaluates/weighs variations from static patterns of
values the same DQ that is an aspect of evolving entities and that has no
reality without sq?'
The "logic of contradictory identity" being the foundation of the MoQ is a
good way to describe things. It reminds me of some things I wrote before on
this list:
10/6/01 13:02 +0200
'Yes, "anything that has been written on the MoQ [is part of] ... an
intellectual static pattern". That doesn't mean a MoQ itself necessarily is.
Oxymorons and paradoxes generally are ways of intellect to reach beyond
itself, to cope with a reality that is perceived only at the very limits of
our range of vision, a reality that includes the indefinable. "Fingers
pointing to the moon", they were described before on this list, if I
understood correctly from my cursory browsings of archives. They are
comparable to the role of rituals in cave-man's primitive religion: ways of
society to reach beyond itself, founding intellect.'
17/6/01 22:48 +0200
'I feel (but can't yet fully explain) that metaphysics is (one of the ways
of) latching DQ on a 5th level of static patterns of value. Metaphysics
can't be fully founded by intellect. Part of it remains "a matter of faith
and belief" (Marty's and Clarke's words 6/6 10:04 -0700 and 15:39 -0400)
when it can't ever be completely understood by the empirical and rational
modes of knowing (as John explained 15:33 +1000 rephrasing Ken Wilber). The
"groping 5th level" (Bo 7/6 20:36 +0200) seems to me to be connected to
John/Wilber's spiritual mode of knowing. Shouldn't this 5th level "offer
freedom to lower levels of evolution" (Lila ch. 12, Bantam edition p.176)
more specifically to intellectual patterns of value (science, theology
etc.)? "Freedom" means "freedom from and breaking static patterns" (or
"putting them to sleep"?! Lila ch. 30, Bantam edition p. 440), e.g. freedom
from and breaking the rules of rational discussion. We should learn to use
metaphors, paradoxes and experience that isn't immediately translated into
an opinion in this mailing list if we want to explore this realm and want to
be instrumental in latching DQ on a 5th level.'
About how this "logic of contradictory identity" appears at each Quality
level:
The split of Quality in DQ and sq not being a division might imply that the
split of Quality in different levels isn't either. Maybe we shouldn't seek
the "logic of contractory identity" not 'in' each level, as if they were
seperate, but in the way the levels interact and are yet discrete. A start
might be what I wrote before:
16/6 21:59 +0200
"My interpretation of the MoQ would be that social patterns OPERATE under
their own set of moral codes and EVOLVE because of interaction with other
levels.
Pirsig writes in ch. 11 of Lila 'Biological evolution can be seen as a
process by which weak Dynamic forces at a subatomic level discover
stratagems for overcoming huge static inorganic forces at a superatomic
level.'
By analogy I would say 'Social evolution can be seen as a process by which
weak Dynamic forces at a subcellular level discover stratagems for
overcoming huge static biological forces at a supercellular level.' and
'Intellectual evolution can be seen as a process by which weak Dynamic
forces at an individual level discover stratagems for overcoming huge static
social forces at a collective level.'"
The next type of evolution might imply the discovery of stratagems employing
the "logic of contradictory identity" and "metaphors, paradoxes and
experience that isn't immediately translated into an opinion" ...
With friendly greetings,
Wim
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 : Fri Oct 25 2002 - 16:06:19 BST