ROGER WELCOMES CURTIS
Hi Curtis!
Great first post. Some comments.......
CURTIS:
Within the
biological species 'dog' there are individuals, which vary considerably; and
there is the species. The species is the sum of the individuals. Each dog is
exploring his own dimension of Quality, and the species is following another
dimension. The two dimensions are inextricably linked, which is perhaps why
Pirsig overlooked the distinction.
ROG:
I argued that Pirsig could have sliced reality differently when I first
joined the squad too. My objection was that value patterns for DNA differ
from those for an organism, which differ from those of an ecosystem. Over
time, I found the best way for me to make sense of the 4 levels is to view
them as logical places where the value patterns actually begin to (using
terms from complexity theory) seek a new attractor. The new attractor is not
180 degrees from the prior, it is more like 90 degrees (if you then draw a
picture of them connected, you get A WAVE). I believe that the combined
interactions of genotype, phenotype and ecotype (my own word) seek a
particular set of value attractors. Reproduction, consumption, and inorganic
freedom are obvious examples.
One other thing to consider is that your 'species' is comprised of biology
and society. Dog's are extremely social.
Overall, I join the camp that says Pirsig's cuts are logical and appropriate,
though they are not necessarily the only way to slice reality. Magnus and
Jonathan would both disagree with me, I believe, but for opposite reasons.
CURTIS:
Social Quality and Intellectual Quality are analogues of Dog Species and Dog
Individuals. They are linked, but they are on the *same* level.
This perception of Quality cleans up lots of Pirsigs platypuses, which he
didn't even realize were there. The most glaring one is the placement of
intellectual Q above social Q. Both levels co-exist!
ROG:
All levels co-exist. Why is this a platypus? I think the value attractors
for society are quite different than for science, logic and metaphysics.
Remember, Intellect is not another name for thinking. It is a socially
derived pattern which stresses that knowledge must be elegant, logically
consistent and objective. The intellectual level is built on society, not on
individuals.
CURTIS:
Another omission of MOQ is the recognition that Dynamic Quality exists
everywhere at all times. Sometimes its presence appears to be lacking,
because we can't recognize the minute changes ocurring; but the changes are
always there. No two events can be exactly the same. Therefore, what Pirsig
defines as static Quality is simply a lack of refinement in our perception.
Quality is Dynamic!
ROG:
I pretty much agree with you here. Though I would state that sq is a very
useful concept for explaining 'latching' and 'conceptualization' and patterns
of experience. However, all is DQ.
CURTIS:
So: what we have here is two branches of perception of Quality. Inorganic
quality should also be split, but that is beyond the scope of this message.
intellectual Quality | social Quality
biological Quality in Individual | biological Quality in Species
inorganic quality
Comments?
ROG:
I disagree, but then again, I am often wrong. Let's see what others think.
Rog
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 - 16:03:09 BST