From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sat Jan 08 2005 - 15:21:06 GMT
Hi Ham,
> Those "this is better than that" decisions express our individual
> value-sense. The values ('good' and 'bad') that each of us realizes are
> what differentiates us as individuals. Taken in their entirety, they
> represent the essence of one's reality. I consider this
> value-discriminating capacity as unique to human experience and the
> teleological goal of life. That is "what makes the world go around", not
> morality, as I understand it. Whether the valuistic nature of existence
> constitutes "morality" or not may be arguable.
It's definitely "arguable" because Pirsig uses "values" as a synonym for
"morals." If you could ever bring yourself to accept values as morals, you
would immediately become a Pirsigian.
> What troubles me about extending the concept of morality to physical
> phenomena is that it demeans the very notion of human independence from the
> phenomenal world. It invites the supposition that consciousness is an
> evolutionary by-product of the biological world, thereby supporting
> geneticists like Dawkin's who are only too eager to "improve" the human
> species through cybernetic engineering and "artifical intelligence". What,
> if any, is the MOQ's moral position on that issue?
About artificial intelligence, Pirsig said this:
"Since the MOQ states that consciousness (i.e. intellectual patterns) is
the collection and manipulation of symbols, created in the brain, that
stand for patterns of experience, then artificial intelligence would be
the collection and manipulation of symbols, created in a machine, that
stand for patterns of experience. If one agrees that experience exists at
the inorganic level, then it is clear that computers already have
artificial intelligence. A question arises if the term "consciousness" is
expanded to mean "intuition" or "mystic awareness." Then computers are
shut out by the fact that static patterns do not create Dynamic quality."
(Note 32, Lila's Child)
As you know, Pirsig slices experience for purposes of thinking about it
into four value levels--inorganic, biological, social and intellectual.
The upper two levels, social and intellectual, evolved only in human
beings. Thus, a large group of individual computers does not a nation
make, nor do computers gather to listen to a live performance of
Rachmaniov's Third Piano Concerto or visit the Met Museum.
Until computers are capable of the latter, I guess the MOQ position on
"improving" the human condition through DNA manipulation and artificial
intelligence would be, "Not to worry." Biologically behaving humans who
enjoy setting off car bombs are scary enough.
Best,
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 08 2005 - 15:19:05 GMT