Roger Agrees With Kevin on Conflict
Kevin Writes:
<<
However, I do agree that higher level conflicts are necessary to achieve
balance. For example, the war which Pirsig describes between social and
intellectual values could not have been resolved without the conflicts of
the last century. However, these conflicts are but necessary evils and the
minute the become unnecessary it is time to look for compromise and
resolution - i.e. balance. >>
I agree with your more balanced view of the MOQ. Too many Squadies (including
IMHO 2 recent posts in our sister forum) emphasize the opposition at the
expense of the synergy toward higher DQ. Each of the levels starts as an
extension of the prior level,in a slightly new direction. It then develops a
pattern of its own which begins to break away from the paradigms below.
When I graphically depict the levels, I draw the first as rising at a 45
degree angle. Biology comes out at a right angle from this....in some ways it
opposes inorganic, in others it directly re-enforces it..... but the overall
direction is neutral to inorganic....it balances out. Society then emerges
out at a right angle , then intellect. The overall picture (condensed to two
dimensions) looks like a zig- zag up toward DQ.
When first learning of the MOQ , I found the 'conflict aspects' enlightening,
then I found the synergistic aspects fascinating. Now I just find it all
fascinating.
All is presumed GOOD.
Roger
PS --I agree with your recent thots on this topic David!!!
MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:54 BST