From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Fri Oct 25 2002 - 17:40:42 BST
Hi Sam, Peter, Davor, All:
A most interesting discussion! I find myself changing my mind with
each succeeding post on the subject. So whatever I write here is to be
taken, as Sam suggested about his own posts, as "largely making this
up as I go along."
First, I'd like to focus on what Sam said:
> Quality
> produces everything, so I agree with the second part - but what is the
> vehicle of intellectual evolution? Individual choices.
This sparked the question, "What is the vehicle of ALL evolution if not
individual choices, whether by a particle or an atom or a cell or a hive or
a person?" In other words, at every stage of evolution, an individual had
to be first. Recall Pirsig describing in Chap. 11 how the weak forces of
Dynamic Quality invented an individual protein molecule in order to
make life possible, a molecule that could respond to the lure of DQ to
be free from "huge static inorganic forces." Today, of course, it's true as
Sam says that individual particles, atoms, molecules, cells, hives and
such are "wholly static . . . blind to DQ and therefore dead." But, that
fact does not alter the conclusion that at one time some of those
individuals were very much capable of responding to DQ. Thus the idea
that an individual level is a product of evolution fails because individuals
have been the progenitors of evolution from the very beginning. In that
regard, there's nothing unique about human beings who are the current
individual responders to DQ, carrying on where sensitive atoms,
molecules and the like left off ages ago.
Secondly, a way to look at the levels is to think of them as prevailing
static forces left behind by the free force of DQ. So for example, where
biological forces hold sway, such as among individual animals, the main
operating motto is, "Might makes right." Where social forces reign, the
maxim individuals abide by if they want to survive is, "What does
society (or the local dictator) demand?" Where intellect dominates, the
byword for individuals is "Is it logical?" and/or "Is it scientific?" Looking
at the levels this way helps you identify whether you or another
individual is at any one time under the influence of the forces of biology,
society, intellect or DQ and respond accordingly. (Fighting biological
criminal behavior is an example Pirsig uses.) By maintaining the
emphasis on the forces at work at each level rather than the entities
within the levels the MOQ carries more explanatory power.
Thirdly, I find myself (and I assume others) swinging back and forth
between focusing on the one or the many, the individual or the group,
the goose or the gaggle. Basically, if we accept Sam's proposal of a
social level followed by an individual level, we are in a sense adopting a
very familiar and not very instructive whole/parts, one/many division that
IMO takes a lot of away from the historical insights and evolutionary
originality provided by the MOQ. Since we can divide any of the four
levels into micro individuals to suit a rhetorical need we have at any
particular time (today, let's examine the quark), I find the division Sam
makes at the macro level relatively unproductive.
Being very much a "hallelujah individual" kind of guy who worships at
the feet of the Rembrandts, Mozarts and Wordsworths of the world, my
"empathy" is entirely with Sam. But my rational and aesthetic side says
to hold on the Pirsig's original "poem."
Platt
P.S. Peter's quote from Beethoven is a gem: "Music is the electric soil
in which the spirit lives, thinks and invents." I think you can substitute
"art" for "music" and "DQ" for "spirit" and not violate the understanding
of the quote which, incidentally, is beyond rationality, indicating a fifth
level of "beauty."
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 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 10:38:03 GMT