99 PERCENTERS: There have been so many great posts lately. I'd like to
respond to a million different things, but... Ken's post was great,
except I'd put value where he has trial and error. I think the universe
demonstates that it is a lot smarter than mere "chance". And I don't
thin sentience changed the operation of DQ, although some pretty weird
stuff has happened as a result of the intellectual level patterns.
Glove's definition of static patterns in his Moday post was right on.
Especially where he says "..the four levels are exhaustive, containing
everything we can conceive of. We cannot conceive outside of them".
Jonathan's post on the REALization of static patterns nailed it too.
Lotta good stuff! What follows is a reply to Walter's queries.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Walter Balestra [SMTP:Balestra@ibmail.nl]
> Sent: Monday, March 22, 1999 2:28 PM
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Subject: MD Realism/idealism and other possible confusions
>
> Hi Glove, David, Rog, Mary and others,
>
> Digging so deep into the nature of DQ it was bount to be that we would
> hit on the
> ancient realism/idealism dichotomy. Seeing that it hasn't been the
> point of arguement much in this discussion group (as far as I know) it
> shows that the MoQ can coincide with both views on reality. I believe
> Pirsig doesn't really enter this metaphysical arena. Although I think
> he's a pragmatic realist he could also be a pragmatic idealist.
>
>
[David Buchanan] To speculate a little, I'd say the
realist/idealist debate is one of those SOM problems Pirsig's MOQ is
supposed to solve, or rather dis-solve. It seems to be a lot like the
mind/body problem and it even resembles the classic/romantic split. The
MOQ makes these classic riddles evaporate. It's like the ancient
Sanskrit and our own English word "right" meaning both morally proper
and factually correct. Rather than view them as yet another dualism, the
MOQ says both meanings are really the same. It's also a little like the
ancient Greek word "techni", which can be used to describe the
manufacture of a plow or the creation of art. In both cases it just
means "to make" something. Obviously, it is the origin of the English
word "technology". This is a little vague and impressionistic, but you
know what I mean.
> I agree with most of David's view until now, but the next piece needs
> explanation: David:
> > I think it is the former, solipsistic view that leads Roger and Mary
> to conclude
> > that awareness begins only at the biological level. I think this
> view of inorganic
> > patterns contradicts the very heart of the MOQ. All observable
> phenomena are patterns of value. Even inorganic patterns are "alive"
> and aware, although they have no thoughts or self-consciousness. Those
> are only found at the intellectual level.
>
> I asked this question to Platt and Roger before in the Principles of
> the MoQ-posts, but maybe you can answer David to avoid further
> confusion. I agree with you that awareness doesn't presuppose a form
> of self-consciousness, but doesn't awareness out of it's very
> definition presuppose a form of sensory input? For me a leave on a
> tree isn't aware of the wind that's making it move in the tree, except
> if it is meant with awareness that the leaf experiences (goes through
> the experience of) an interaction with the wind.
>
[David Buchanan] This is really slippery stuff. It does seem
unimaginable for rocks or moons to have any kind of consciousness or
awareness. Some kind of sense organs or nerve cells seem essential. But
I'm fairly certain that there are single-celled organisms that have
neither of these, yet they can "react" to their enviroment. These
creatures are an example of patterns that are very close to the
inorganic level. Their biology resembles very complex chemical reactions
more than it resembles us.
I'll address the leaf analogy from another perspective. If
patterns of value are both morally sound and factually correct, then the
leaf demonstates knowledge of the wind in its' very structure. Think of
the supple stem that lets the leaf flutter in the wind, or the way palm
leaves are designed to survive hurricane winds. The venus fly trap has
leaves that "feel" insects and can trap them. The structure of those
leaves is like a tiny prison for bugs. Structure and awareness are
inextricably linked in the MOQ. Plato wasn't so wrong after all. The
structure of all patterns of value is somehow the shape of awareness
itself.
As Jonathan says, static patterns are "realized" Quality.
Sincere thanks to all posters!
David B.
> MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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