From: Steve Peterson (peterson.steve@verizon.net)
Date: Wed Apr 02 2003 - 00:53:29 BST
> Hi Platt, Steve,
>
> A brief comment on an interesting thread:
>
> S:
>>> I'll think more about it, but my feeling right now is that aesthetic
>>> patterns are on a higher level than intellectual. Sam talked about the
>>> "three bests" a while back--the Good, the True, and the Beautiful.
> These
>>> words may describe high quality on three distinct levels.
>
> Platt:
>> Yes. My question is does "Good" encompass the True and the
>> Beautiful, or does the "Beautiful" stand above the Good and the True? I
>> favor the latter. Maybe the order should be Beautiful on top, then Good,
>> then True, with True the equivalent of Pirsig's intellectual level.
>
> Of the three, I think the True is the most derivative (ie we choose world
> views, within which 'truth' is determined, on the basis of what is good and
> beautiful). I'm not certain whether to put the Good or the Beautiful highest
> (or indeed, quite how to discriminate them at the extremes); ultimately they
> both collapse into what I think of as God, which is the source of it all -
> both Good and Beautiful (and True, of course!).
All three are words that apply to quality in general, but I think of "good"
as having social quality, as in, "Johnny is a good boy." Good and bad are
the subjective social distinctions that most people think of as the whole of
morality. The word does not apply so well to the MOQ understanding of
social morality, but it describes what most people think of as moral
behavior.
I think "true" applies best to the intellectual level. It is concerned with
what SOMers think of as objective and amoral. F=ma would be commonly
labeled as "true" but never as "good." (Some science types could see it as
beautiful.) Since the intellectual level depends on the social level,
MOQers may see "true" as subjective as well.
I think "beautiful" may apply to a static level above intellectual or it may
apply best to a high quality experience of a balance between static and
dynamic.
I also like Platt's suggestion that it may be a good word to use to describe
evolution, i.e, we could say patterns evolve towards beauty as we say they
do towards freedom.
Thanks,
Steve
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 : Wed Apr 02 2003 - 02:08:17 BST