Re: MD SQ-SQ coherence and tension.

From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Sat Jan 17 2004 - 21:53:24 GMT

  • Next message: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com: "MD David Bowie a Sophist?"

    Hello Mark

    Mark 17-01-04: Hello Paul, Good to hear from you. At this moment, i am in the
    thick of it study wise, and distracted!

    Mark said:
    May i ask if you find any value in the description of exceptional SQ-SQ
    coherence/tension as that point at which DQ influences evolution?

    Paul:
    Yes, it is a good general description of what may be a universal
    process.

    Mark said:
    I feel this description accords with Lila, SODV and ZMM, and delivers a
    sound view of Human intellect as a creative and intuitive living process
    - a code of art.

    Paul:
    I agree. Lately I have been giving a lot of thought to Pirsig's
    statement that the "classic pattern of rationality can be tremendously
    improved, expanded and made far more effective through the formal
    recognition of Quality in its operation."

    I take this as calling for the acknowledgement of an MOQ axiom - you
    *know* something is good before you know *why* it is good - in the use
    of intellect, which usually only perceives something as good after it
    has provided a "why." I am having a little trouble with the "formal"
    part. The structure of the MOQ formally acknowledges the relationship
    between Dynamic Quality and static intellectual patterns at a general
    level, as does your description above, but is this really something one
    can *formally* acknowledge and implement?

    Mark 17-01-04: I was beginning to hear myself as a voice in the wilderness;
    but not any more. It's always good to hear you think out loud.

    How do you set about to improve the operation of rationality? The
    general idea is that reason and rationality should be more like art. You
    don't sit down to "do art," art tends to do itself. Reason, on the other
    hand, is normally called upon to solve certain problems, fix things,
    design things etc. Perhaps the best way to begin to operate with what
    Pirsig refers to as Quality might be to develop (or rediscover) your
    ability to recognise it, recognise its process, unmistakeably. Whilst
    Zen archery is one way to become familiar with Dynamic Quality, is there
    a way which is closer to the practice of using intellect?

    Mark 17-01-04: Absolutely. You are expressing here notions i could not
    express myself, but have been considering - and the method i use is to ask the
    question and then forget about it.
    Recently, two little nibbles on the fishing line responded, making a slight
    quiver, but i do not know how good they are? The first came reading Jordan
    Ganeri's Philosophy in Classical India. Jordan is a Cambridge mathematician and
    studying of philosophy in London and Oxford.
    In this book, Jordan tells us that the type of logic we use, (Western or
    Indian and their manifold varieties) is, '...a fine balance.' Now, that phrase,
    '...a fine balance' sounds like an aesthetic does it not? And our working
    description of beauty is exceptional SQ-SQ coherence in the event stream. Does this
    make any sense Paul?
    The second nibble, regarding social convention, i shall send in another post.

    You have gone down the path of ostensive definition which is certainly
    part of becoming familiar with Quality in other people's/nature's
    behaviour. How about "recognising" Quality in one's own behaviour? In
    ZMM, Pirsig suggests that the inverse of Quality is simply caring. He
    also talks about taking the Zen-like approach of "just fixing." Also,
    the whole section on his teaching methods at Bozeman was about the role
    of Quality in intellectual composition. Perhaps we could begin by giving
    some major current theories the MOQ treatment? Pirsig was clearly
    concerned with the state of cultural anthropology.

    Mark 17-01-04: An excellent suggestion. Wouldn't it be an excellent
    development if this forum got the ball rolling instead of getting stuck?

    Anyway, that's just a bit of thinking out loud. In short, having
    satisfied myself that the MOQ offers an enormous improvement on other
    descriptions of the universe that I have come across, I support you,
    Mark, in your efforts to start applying its principles but I don't have
    a set of practical suggestions ready. That might take a couple of weeks
    longer :-)

    cheers

    Paul

    Mark 17-01-04: Thanks for your reassuring words. I needed them a great deal.
    And don't rush those nibbles? They arrive in good time?
    All the best,
    Mark

    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 17 2004 - 21:59:54 GMT