Dear all of the MD Group.
Regarding the current Dynamic Quality inquiry I tend to agree with
Magnus when he wrote:
> Dynamic Quality a'la Magnus:
> The answer to the question,
> - How can anything become?
:-) , but if forced to say something about DQ I want to repeat what
Platt said to Jonathan:
> Pirsig suggests what he means by "towards" DQ when he says that DQ's
> "only perceived good is freedom." It follows that life can be described as
> "migration of static patterns towards" more freedom. DQ is the "talent-
> spotter" (to use your phrase) in its quest for freedom from stifling static
> patterns.
FREEDOM! Yes, do we really need more definitions of its "nature",
goals and directions? Not as I see it.
I also want to return to something that Platt wrote after reading an
newspaper article:
> Writing in the New York Times book review, A. C. Grayling, who teaches
> philosophy at Birkbeck College, London, and editor of "Philosophy: A
> Guide Through the Subject," says:
> "The perennial ideas that grip the philosophic imagination and more or
> less exhaust (in both senses) its endeavor can be summarized as two:
> the idea of meaning or value in the universe, and the idea that reality has
> an ultimate nature. The two are linked, in that they supply or at least
> suggest interpretations of each other..............
........snip.
I don't think Grayling's statement has something to do with the
Quality idea (Platt doesn't say so either), I'm afraid that his
"ultimate nature" refers to SOM's OBJECTIVE reality and that his
"value" is the 'lead balloon' of Kluckhohn in LILA. This much said I
very much agree that philosophy boils down to the ideas of VALUE or
MEANING which automatically answers the ULTIMATE question (I would
have liked "goal" instead of nature because the latter is so SOMish).
So did Magnus who (in a reply to this) said that they are one and the
same: if there is value there's a goal (teleology).
To relay newspaper/magazine articles and other inputs that have a
bearing on our discussion is very useful, and in this context I must
tell you something that made me jump the other day. This was by radio
so I can't guarantee that I got everything right, but it was about a
Danish future researcher who had written a book called "The Dream
Society" in which he gave the following picture of past and future
history:
Stage: Name: Reality: Leader:
1 Hunter/Gatherer many gods he tribe elders
2 Agriculture the God the landowner
3 Industry the product capital owners
4 Information knowledge rational experts
5 Dream Society experience emotion creators
He said that the last stage would be a return to the first one
in a spiral sense.
As I see it is this a description of a MOQ based culture (by one
who of course haven't heard of Pirsig) Experience as primary
reality is pure MOQ while dreams and fantasies are more
unfamiliar and is is not used much in LILA, (but lots of dreaming in
ZMM), but I guess they are just another Dynamic Quality channel.
Bodvar
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:35 BST