Hi, Mark and MOQers!
This is three for today. Hooboy.
I think we're closing in on our difference of opinion, Mark. This has
been a fine way to pass a rainy Sunday here in Indiana.
Mark wrote:
> Lila (pp.180-181 teal paperback):
>
> "It [MoQ] says that even at the most fundamental level of the universe,
> static patterns of value and moral judgements are identical. The "Laws of
> Nature" are moral laws."
If you go on to Chapter 13, pp 182-183 (teal) you will see that the "Law
of Nature" moral code, which describes phenomena such as atoms, is but
one of four macro-codes, if you will. The intellectual moral code, that
which governs society, is still and only the province of sentience.
> I shouldn't have continued with the amoeba example. It was a poor choice on
> my part. An electron, however, is better suited to my point. There is no
> good predictor as to where any given electron will be at any given time. My
> interpretation of this is that the electron *chooses*, in MoQ terms, where
> the best location is for the moment.
>
> (Lila teal, p 181)
>
> "The question of whether an electron does a certain thing because it
> has to or because it wants to is completely irrelevant to the data of
> what the electron does."
and
> What this comes down to is the fact that, moral decisions are not necessary
> reasoned or rational. Therefore, moral decisions do not require sentience.
Depending, of course, on which level the moral decision is being made.
> > Ants operate in three of the levels. The social structure of the ant is
> > not dynamic, except in the course of evolution. No ant can decide to
> > usurp the power of the queen and set up a kingdom.
>
> On the contrary, an ant could and would promptly be killed. Also, future
> queen ants do just this sort of usurping, culminating in regicide, do they
> not?
My unfortunate example this time. Had I said worker ant, the example
would have made sense. The actual point is that the social structure of
the ant colony will be essentially unchanged even after the regicide.
Semantics is probably our main problem. We've already established that
we agree on conclusions.
> > I believe that comes down to the ultimately unknowable. Prime Mover?
> > God? Random accident in an alternate universe? It's here whether or not
> > we can say how, as Platt so eloquently wrote. I did not say that change
> > was not possible in the other levels, I maintain that an outside
> > catalyst is required.
>
> Yes, granted...but that does not need to be humans or sentient in any way,
> shape, or form. It could be pure Dynamic Quality as Pirsig describes in
> the above quote.
Agreed. It could just as easily be an asteroid.
> Anyway, I wasn't asking about how the universe was created, but rather how
> life was created. Pirsig states that inorganic patterns created life
> because it's "better."
Better being more dynamic.
> Well, what is your definition of free will?
The power, or capacity, to choose among alternatives or to act in
certain situations independently of natural, social, or divine
restraints. By that definition, the cat could not act in any way other
than to try to get off of that hot stove. A human can decide to put up
with that hot stove (as in the case of torture) if the moral imperative
is strong enough. History is replete with such cases.
> If it's an ability to choose
> and electrons can choose and I can choose and animals can choose (all found
> in that section in Lila), then all of those items have free will.
and
> I think my definition of free will as a measure of Dynamic-ness fits better in the
> MoQ then a human-centric one. It also seems more consistent with how Pirsig
> seems to redefine choice in the MoQ.
I try not to redefine standard philosophical terms if I can avoid it. In
this case I'm on admittedly shaky ground to start with since free will
and determinism are both dismissed as irrelevant by Pirsig. In the case
of the intellectual-over-society moral code, free will is a useful term
to differentiate between a reasoned choice and an unreasoned one.
> But hey, I could be dead wrong...
So could I.
Maybe we're both right.
drose
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