Re: MD Intellectual Art (Dynamic Morality)

From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Tue Apr 01 2003 - 21:46:00 BST

  • Next message: Steve Peterson: "Re: MD Intellectual Art (Dynamic Morality)"

    Dear Steve & Johnny,

    Steve wrote 1 Apr 2003 10:44:23 -0500:
    'It may be possible to derive some rules of thumb based on the idea of
    following DQ. For example, I think Wim uses a rule of thumb that to
    respond to a situation violently is not the best response. I also remember
    that he said that he wouldn't rule out violence in all cases because to rule
    any behavior out would be to close himself off to DQ.'

    That's indeed my rule of thumb. I don't expect to ever be 'called' to use
    violence if I follow DQ. But I can be wrong. 'Expectation' is only a pattern
    in past experience.
    I wonder if (consciously) 'deriving rules of thumb from experience of
    following DQ' isn't the essence of the intellectual level. That may be how
    intellectual patterns of value get 'static': by following the rule of thumb
    instead of following DQ directly.

    Johnny wrote 1 Apr 2003 19:18:32 +0000 (leaving aside his inaccurate account
    of other people's positions):
    'a person should try to be moral, in the sense of doing what most people
    would do. That ... is really the definition of morality. ... ethics is not
    the ontological substance of reality, morality is. I think a moral
    philosophy ought to be in agreement and harmony with ontology, not in
    opposition to it.'

    Ethics describes what people SHOULD do and morality describes what people
    WOULD (can be expected to) do?! Maybe.
    Anyway, this 'ontological substance of reality', that which we can know
    (only experience of value, according to the empiricism the MoQ subscribes to
    according to the beginning of chapter 8 of 'Lila'), is indeed identified by
    Pirsig with morality (end of chapter 7). It is (according to Pirsig) not
    only experience of static patterns of value, or static quality however. The
    WHOLE of 'Quality is morality' and after the first metaphysical cut of this
    Quality/morality you don't only have static patterns of value (applied to
    people: that which they can be expected to do) but also Dynamic Quality.
    Dynamic Quality is morality too! People can be expected to deviate from prev
    ious patterns every now and then.
    In chapter 13 of 'Lila' Pirsig uses 'evolutionary morality' as a synonym for
    his MoQ. According to Pirsig it is 'scientifically immoral for everyone to
    eat the flesh of animals', adding that 'the moral force of this injunction
    is not so great because the levels of evolution [of animals on the one hand
    and of grains and fruits and vegetables on the other hand] are closer
    together than the doctor's patient and the germ'.
    The MoQ sanctions deviant behavior in the name of 'evolution' towards DQ.

    So yes, a person should try to be moral, by balancing following the highest
    available static patterns of value (and not falling back on lower,
    degenerate, ones) and following Dynamic Quality whenever a contribution to
    evolution is possible.

    With friendly greetings,

    Wim

    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 : Tue Apr 01 2003 - 21:48:28 BST