ROGER SEES THE MOQ AS CONTRADICTORY
To Horse and Rich;
RICH STARTED WITH A PIRSIG QUOTE :
"...To the extent that one's behavior is controlled by static
patterns of quality it is without choice. But to the extent that one
follows Dynamic Quality, which is undefinable, one's behavior is
free." - pg.180>> AND:>
"...societies and thoughts and principles themselves are no more than
sets of static patterns. These patterns can't by themselves perceive
or adjust to Dynamic Quality. Only a living being can do that."
TO WHICH HORSE REPLIED:
In the second paragraph I think he is talking about the ascent
through the levels and the degree of awareness of the various
functions of each level which relates to the control that can be
exercized over them, which determines the degree of 'free will'. The
closer to dynamic reality/quality the greater the choice that can be
made because of the increase in awareness.
ROGER NOW ADDS:
Cities, Cultures and Theories can't adjust to DQ? This statement is messy
because two of the highest levels are usually connected with humans, but to
state that only humans can perceive or respond to DQ goes against the spirit
of his own levels. Cities and cultures do dynamically respond and change
their patterns, and it isn't necessarily a person or group that does it. The
pattern can be unplanned by humans, but still emerge due to dynamic
interaction within the system. Now is this "free will"? Perhaps not in
classic SOM terms, but in the MOQ I would say it is.
Pirsig contradicts himself here.
Roger
(a spatiotemporal cohesion of SPoV's)
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:56 BST