Hello everyone
Ian Warburton writes:
>Greetings,
>
>Pirsig states that the different levels of quality manipulate one another.
>He also states that a level can only effect the one directly above or below
>it. I gathered this from the following....
>
>chpt 24 Lila -
>
> "The idea that biological crimes can be ended by intellect alone, that
>you can talk crime to death doesn't work. Intellectual patterns cannot
>directly control biological patterns. Only social patterns can control
>biological patterns, "
>
>Now this has got me confused.
>
>Let us say that I need to tie my shoelace up. The idea of the knot required
>to tie my laces is surely an intellectual pattern. So I bend down and using
>my fingers (biology) tie the laces (non - biological). O.K, so I've gone
>down through the levels but where is the social level?
>It seems that I've by-passed an entire level of reality and according to my
>interpretation of Pirsig this isn't possible. So either I am missing
>something or else the theory is not as neat as it is supposed to be. I'm
>sure there's an answer to this because my example is hardly an obscure
>phenomenon.
Hi Ian
To take your example of tying a shoelace, the act of learning to tie the
lace is a social level phenomenon predicated on the culture that the
individual inhabits. There are, or have been, cultures in the world who have
no laces to tie, thus there is no need to learn such an act as tying a
shoelace. We are suspended in the culture we inhabit.
>Ian:
>
>This business of communication between the levels is made allot less clear
>with the continuation of the above quote....
>
> " & the instrument of conversation between society and biology is not
>words. The instrument of conversation between society and biology has
always
>been a policeman or soldier and his gun."
>
>I don't use a policeman or a soldier to tie my shoelace.
Glove:
The act of tying a shoelace is mediated by all four levels... for example,
intellectually I notice my shoelace is undone and realize I will trip over
it and injure myself, so I use the socially learned act of tying to allow my
biological fingers to tie my inorganic laces.
>Ian:
>Furthermore, the idea that it is force and not words which manipulate
>someone's behaviour seems to contradict everyday experience. I've read
books
>on personal conduct, understood the words and sometimes decided to alter my
>behaviour in their light. In doing so, I didn't need to beat myself over
the
>head with the book in order to comply. Taking into account that, in such a
>case, my actions were, at least, partly a response to social patterns of
>value, words were indeed the instrument of conversation between society and
>biology.
Glove:
It seems to me that words are the instrument of conversation between the
intellect and the social level. Words failing, then a policeman or a gun is
the instrument of conversation between the social and biological level. The
MOQ would seem to state that words are of higher value than force... the pen
is indeed mighter than the sword.
Hope this helps.
Best wishes,
glove
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 - 16:03:05 BST