Re: MD What is a living being?

From: Valence (valence10@hotmail.com)
Date: Sat May 03 2003 - 19:46:06 BST

  • Next message: Valence: "Re: MD What is a living being?"

    Hey DMB,

    DMB
    ....I'd quibble a bit, however. I don't think it is
    > correct to say that "every human being is a source of ideas". It might be
    > true that every normal healthy person is POTENTIALLY a source of ideas,
    and
    > that persons are the ONLY source of ideas, but I think its pretty clear
    that
    > there are many people in the world who have not yet developed to the
    > intellectual stage.

    RICK
    Basically I agree with you here, though I'm not sure Pirsig would. Given
    his most recent definition of the intellect from LILA'S CHILD, it's hard to
    imagine that there are any normal, healthy people who don't manipulate
    symbols in their brains at all. But, I know what you mean.

    > RICK said:
    > Here we can see that Pirsig was not saying "Static patterns can't perceive
    > or adjust to DQ". Rather, he was saying that social and intellectual
    > patterns can't by themselves perceive or adjust to DQ (which is why he
    > thinks society should preserve as many living beings as possible). Why is
    > this? Because after the rise of the biological level, *life* became the
    > primary vehicle for DQ.
    >
    > dmb says:
    > I'd quibble here too, and for the same basic reason. I'd say all static
    > patterns can respond to DQ, BUT ONLY ON THEIR OWN LEVEL. Atoms and
    molecules
    > can respond at the inorganic level, but biology, society and intellect is
    > beyond an atom's abilities. The higher levels just don't register.

    RICK
    I think we're saying the same thing, I was just saying it differently. I
    only meant to imply that beyond the inorganic level only carbon based
    patterns respond to DQ, beyond the biological level only homosapien based
    patterns respond to DQ, beyond the social level only intellectuals respond
    to DQ (according to Pirsig that is, Sam has put forth a fuller conception of
    the 4th level in recent Eudiamonic MoQ essay which I am currently writing a
    'review' of).

    DMB
    ...And the reason, clearly, that social and intellectual changes can
    > only occur through living humans, is that such values are beyond all rocks
    > and animals and everything, except for people.

    RICK
    Exactly.

    DMB
    Only people can perceive the
    > 3rd and 4th levels of static quality.

    RICK
    Ultimately, yes. Though a little general for my tastes. I'd prefer
    something like... only homosapiens can perceive the 3rd level, and only
    intellectuals can perceive the 4th level (or as Sam would have it only
    'autonomous individuals' can perceive the 4th level).

    thanks David

    take care
    rick

    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 May 03 2003 - 19:46:24 BST