From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Mon Mar 22 2004 - 16:55:09 GMT
Hi Mark,
Pirsig uses the common meaning of 'coherence,' i.e., "relating to the
order and consistency of thought." (Rand House dictionary). He writes:
"As long as you're inside a logical, coherent universe of thought you
can't escape metaphysics." (Lila-5)
That's why your use of 'coherence' seems odd and hardly descriptive of the
evolutionary process, a process that took place long before thought was
created by the human brain.
Mark 22-03-04: Hi Platt,
You say here, '...a process that took place long...' as if evolution is not
happening right here and now? As an intellectual postulation, Evolution is
happening all the time and at all levels simultaneously, here and now. In MoQ
terms this is described in two ways:
1. The event stream (DQ). (SODV)
2. Static patterns migrating towards DQ. (Lila.)
Static patterns emerge from DQ and yet are migrating towards DQ.
We may accommodate these two apparently contradictory points by postulating a
relationship between SQ and DQ derived from experience: Coherence.
"Value, the leading edge of reality, is no longer an irrelevant offshoot
of structure. Value is the predecessor of structure. It's the
preintellectual awareness that gives rise to it. Our structured reality
is preselected on the basis of value, and really to understand
structured reality requires an understanding of the value source from
which it's derived." [ZMM Ch.24]
In the Metaphysics of Quality, (Value is a synonym for Quality, so in the
above quote we may regard Value as Quality) Quality has two aspect, SQ and DQ.
Therefore, to paraphrase:
'Our structured reality is preselected on the basis of a relationship between
SQ and DQ.'
"The Dynamic reality that goes beyond words is the constant focus of Zen
teaching. Because of their habituation to a world of words, philosophers
do not often understand Zen. When philosophers have trouble
understanding the distinction between static and Dynamic Quality it can
be because they are trying to include and subordinate all Quality to
thought patterns. The distinction between static and Dynamic quality is
intended to block this." [letter from Robert Pirsig to Anthony McWatt,
quoted in "Pirsig's Metaphysics of Quality"]
Thought patterns cannot deal with DQ, but thought patterns ARE patterns, and
share a relationship with DQ as described above:
1. The event stream (DQ). (SODV)
2. Static patterns migrating towards DQ. (Lila.)
> Coherence is the degree to which evolution has pushed the
> static repertoire. The more evolution advances, the more severe coherence
> becomes.
What this has to do with 'thought' escapes me. And the adjective 'severe'
when applied to 'coherence' makes no sense at all. What is 'severe orderly
and consistent thought?'
Mark 22-03-04: Thought is patterned. Patterns are migrating towards DQ.
Patterns emerge from DQ. These are accommodated in the term Coherence.
Coherence can be extreme - severe. This possibility is right outside everyday
experience, but when encountered, can be a revelation. An example would be to
be in the presence of a master artist. The coherence of a master can
influence (raise coherence of) the open student dramatically.
In exceptional situations, coherence may approach opaqueness to DQ:
"In the language of everyday life, reality and intellect are different.
From the language of the Buddha's world, they are the same, since there
is no intellectual division that governs the Buddha's world." [Lila's
Child p.567]
> Thus, we have a term which includes two motions: DQ as the
> motivation of evolution, and DQ as the goal towards which evolution is
> heading.
The goal of DQ, as I'm sure you know, is freedom from all static patterns.
That's the highest value of all. Nor is there anything significant in DQ
having 'two motions.' Motivations presupposes goals, like good presupposes
evil and black presupposes white.
Mark 22-03-04: If what you say is correct, this implies a change in character
of the relationship between SQ and DQ as this relationship evolves? I
describe this change in character as an increase in the severity of coherence.
> Coherence is here and now. When coherence fades, patterns become
> more static and less beautiful. When coherence increases, evolution moves
> forward and beauty is more intense.
IMO you are inventing meanings for 'coherence,' and I'm not sure what
those meanings are. Thus my confusion. Are you suggesting that the more
orderly and consistent our thoughts are, the better? That's what Pirsig
suggests.
Mark 22-03-04: There is a distinction between invention and appliance? You
are limiting the term Coherence to thought. The term coherence is not limited to
thought: The term 'Coherent' is applied to laser light. This is because all
the photons in coherent light are unified; they achieve a higher order of
organisation. By analogy, we may, if we wish, convey the migration of static
patterns towards DQ as an increase in coherence? And my dictionary definition
regards aesthetic unity as coherence also.
I think maybe you and I agree that the more beauty the better.
Best to you,
Platt
Mark 22-03-04: 100% agreement! :-)
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 : Mon Mar 22 2004 - 16:57:08 GMT