From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sun Apr 20 2003 - 18:41:23 BST
Hi Steve:
> >> You said:
> >>> My creation theory is based,
> >>> naturally, on the MOQ and is explained in my "Principles of the MOQ."
> >>> It says:
> >>>
> >>> "Quality is simultaneously an immanent and transcendent moral force. It
> >>> created and gave purpose to the world, motivated by the ethical
> >>> principle of the "Good" which is its essence."
> >>
> >> Is this in Lila's Child?
> >
> > Yes. Chapter 8, page 242.
>
> Platt, I just read it and very much liked it.
>
> I was wondering if the Awareness Principle only applies to humans.
No. It applies to all creatures, great and small.
> If it can apply more broadly, trying it in with the Awareness Hierarchy
> Principle made me think about the following:
>
> Pirsig described cause and effect on the inorganic level as A values
> precondition B (which has sounded loony (your word) to everyone I've ever
> discussed it with.) I was thinking that an awareness always responds as is
> morally expected (hence the address to Johnny) within its highest level of
> awareness.
>
> For example, a molecule will never defy the laws of physics (behave
> immorally) because it is unaware of physical forces.
I think that's right. An entity cannot respond to what it isn't aware of.
> You said an animal will defy the laws of physics. (Could you explain what
> you meant? I'll continue assuming this is true.)
A simple example: birds fly, defying the law of gravity. All progress in
evolution is towards greater freedom from the demands of lower levels.
All great creation is likewise a freeing up of something formerly locked
in a static pattern. The painter Chagall freed color from nature. Calder
freed sculpture from attachment to a ground. Pirsig freed metaphysics
from a morally bankrupt SOM.
>An animal that has only
> reached the biological level of awareness is aware of physical forces, but
> not biological ones, so never violates biological laws (i.e. behave
> biologically immorally). It doesn't know anything about these laws.
Yes.
> A person or animal that is biologically aware but without social awareness
> will violate the law of the jungle and physical laws, but will tend do what
> is socially expected of him unless he regresses to a lower level. (Here
> I'm thinking of Wim's idea of unconscious copying of behavior, not what is
> necessarily usually thought of as "society".) He will always reproduce the
> copied behavior as best he can. He has no idea why he's doing it. (Since
> social laws are not as universal as biological laws and physical laws,
> another socially unaware person may see our person's reproduction of copied
> behavior as immoral, but from the copier's perspective, he is behaving
> morally if he does what his socially expected for his context.)
I really don't know of any people who are "socially unaware" because
their survival depends on the society they belong to. People are very
much aware of other people. However, I agree many don't know "why"
they do what they do, just as many don't know "why" they eat other
than they feel hungry.
> A person who is socially aware but not intellectually aware will have
> conscious motivations for his actions. He always motivate his actions
> based on the unconsciously copied rationales that he has accumulated. He
> will tend to behave intellectually immorally. He will motivate his actions
> with the rationales that are expected of him (within his particular
> context) unless he falls back on "irrational" copied behavior or the law of
> the jungle.
>
> The intellectually aware person may create new and better rationales by
> "thinking about thinking" and seem to be behaving immorally from the
> perspective of the person who is not intellectually aware. This person is
> still unaware of the possible static patterns he is following but are yet
> to be named.
> Platt, am I making any sense to you?
Yes, but I'm not sure where this is leading. Does it explain behavior that
otherwise can't be? Some examples from everyday life would help.
Thanks,
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 : Sun Apr 20 2003 - 18:42:02 BST