In a message dated 11/9/98 9:01:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, RISKYBIZ9@aol.com
(ROGER) writes:
>Welcome Bruce. For too long the Lila Squad has been like Baptists arguing
with
>Methodists whether God exists. Finally, a true skeptic.
>What I hope to do is apply a broader context to
>these problems and suggest how the problem of relative morality and the
>indeterminateness of DQ is actually the MOQ’s genius. The "problem"
>contributes toward the creation of the levels themselves, and is the driving
>force propelling us toward DQ.
The competition of relative, interlevel morality seems to produce subsequent
levels???!!!! This sounds right.
>Walter paraphrase--<<<The morality of a static pattern is determined by the
>potential the pattern has in letting DQ be realized to the maximal and BEST
>extent. The stability of the pattern is important because the pattern’s
>ability to repeat itself longer in time allows it to contribute more to
>higher DQ. The degree of morality of an event is the possibility that DQ,
as
>a consequence of this event, is optimized over time.>>>>>
Now we are seeing the difference of quality and morality. Whe talk about
morality when we talk about and judge Static Quality and DQ (generative or
degenerative). Before we were strictly defining DQ.
>Using the above as a foundation to determine relative morality, below are
some
> perspectives on morality within and between levels:
>IMMORALITY
>...However, as Diana mentions, freedom from
> dominance below becomes the dynamic driver toward the advancement of the
> patterns. The problem.....immorality .....leads to patterns which aren’t
more
> static. They are forced to become more dynamic. That which doesn’t destroy
>us makes us stronger.
Exactly
>IMORALITY BETWEEN PATTERNS-- Same-level patterns don’t have to destroy
> or harm each other to advance dynamically. Symbiosis, domestication,
cultivation >and exchange, are dynamic and moral ways to advance both
patterns. Rather than >just kill each other, they can team up.
> THE HIGHER LEVELS ARE THE
>BEGINNING OF A SOLUTION TO THE RELATIVE MORALITY BELOW. Relative >values
contribute to the very emergence of the values above. It is now time for the
>intellectual level to continue the relay.
People have been asking about the fifth level. Well, I believe this will be
it.
>MORALITY BETWEEN LEVELS-- Because the higher level is more complex and
>dynamic, it is moral to dominate and, if absolutely necessary, destroy a
lower
>level pattern to maintain the higher level solution.
I don't believe this is the case, the Higher level almost always needs the
lower level. If it is destroyed, the higher level will be destroyed as well.
>The higher level pattern
>opposes the base values below it partially to preserve the greatest dynamic
>pattern complexity below. From here, the higher level patterns take off and
>develop patterns of their own that can become seemingly disconnected from
.>those below. The reason these types
of intractions are of low moral value is that they destroy the foundation on
which they are built.
>Going back to Walter’s definition, the most moral course isn’t to sacrifice
>citizens for society, or ecosystems for civilization, or social order for
>personal freedom. As Walter reveals, the most moral course is to preserve
and
>advance the most overall dynamic patterns at all levels over all time.
obviously no argument here
>> RELATIVE MORALITY AND METAPHYSICS-- Metaphysics is an intellectual
>pattern
>describing reality. Any accurate description of reality needs to capture the
>moral ambiguity between patterns. Furthermore, the MOQ recognizes that
>mistakes (intellectual immorality) can lead to advancement of the
intellectual
>level itself!
>Yes, reason often leads to mistakes. However, when this does happen, the
>intellectual values of truth, adaptability and testability should allow us
to
>identify our moral mistakes, correct them, learn from them, and, hopefully,
>not repeat them. The MOQ is our "guidebook" to framing moral problems and
>therefore understanding and resolving them for maximum long term DQ. Every
>moral problem didn’t get answered the day Lila was written. All we got was
a
>better way to understand problems and to dynamically advance in our ability
to
>resolve whatever the universe throws our way.
>Bruce, long answer, but the MOQ is the clearest and most beautiful
>intellectual solution to admittedly complex morality problems. One of the
>first steps to a solution is to truly recognize the size of the problem.
The
>intellectual level allows us to improve our moral compass over time and to
>dynamically advance. Perhaps relative morality is the problem, but then,
>dynamic intellect and the MOQ will be the solution. When you put it in this
>light, moral dilemmas don’t become the weakness of the MOQ, they become a
>driving force propelling it dynamically forward. From an intellectual
level,
>moral dilemmas become the "evil" forcing us to evolve.
>Let me end with a Jonathan quote:....."The ultimate morality is an ensemble
of
>ALL patterns - the ONE"
> Roger >>
Let's put out the MOQ as the beginning of the next level above intellect. I
argued earlier on how in ancient times the intellectual and social knowledge
were integrated because there was no language and need for it. Later the
intellectual and social battled (Socrates and ZMM) and intellect was much more
dynamic and moral. Now the freedom that intellect has created is in conflict
with the static morals(moral relativity). I love Rogers use of "Moral
Compass" in relation to MOQ. I want to throw out the idea that the MOQ will
be the moral compass to the Intellectual Level that tempers the Dynamic
Quality of Intellect to the aims of QUALITY.
Somewhere i keep hearing Dynamic/Static as the next leveland people
questioning it. I don't consider this a level. It is the analytical tool
that MOQ uses to split reality. It is an assumption that is argued as a basis
for the metaphysics. To question the tool is just what Pirsig was doing with
ZMM (and classicism/romanticism) vs subject/object. Are we questioning it?
Where do we go if we are?
Great job, Roger, your summaries are great work.
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 - 16:02:39 BST