From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Thu Mar 25 2004 - 13:11:42 GMT
Hi Mark, Wim:
Mark:
> "Phaedrus thought this was why no one before had ever seemed to have come
> up with the idea that the world is primarily value. The word is too vague.
> The 'value' that holds a glass of water together and the 'value' that holds
> a nation together are obviously not the same thing. Therefore to say that
> the world is nothing but value is just confusing, not clarifying. Now this
> vagueness is removed by sorting out values according to levels of
> evolution. The value that holds a glass of water together is an inorganic
> pattern of value. The value that holds a nation together is a social
> pattern of value. They are completely different from each other because
> they are at different evolutionary levels. And they are completely
> different from biological patterns that can cause the most sceptical of
> intellectuals to leap from a hot stove. These patterns have nothing in
> common except that historic evolutionary process that created all of them.
> But that process is a process of value evolution . Therefore the name
> 'static patterns of value' applies to all. (Lila. page 157)
Note that Pirsig that in this excerpt describes static patterns. Do you
think a glass of water can respond to DQ? We already know a society can't
respond. Pirsig writes: "And beyond that is an even more compelling
reason; societies and thoughts and principles can't by themselves perceive
or adjust to Dynamic Quality." (Lila-13)
> So what Phaedrus was saying was that not just life, but everything, is an
> ethical activity. It is nothing else. When inorganic patterns of reality
> created life, the Metaphysics of Quality postulates that they've done so
> because it's 'better' and that this definition of 'betterness' - this
> beginning response to Dynamic Quality - is an elementary unit of ethics
> upon which all right and wrong can be based. (Lila page 161)
Is life being created today? As for as I know, it was a singular, one-time
event that happened eons ago.
> What was emerging was that the static patterns that hold one level of
> organisation together are often the same patterns that another level of
> organisation must fight to maintain its own existence. Morality is not a
> simple set of rules. It's a very complex struggle of conflicting patterns
> of values. This conflict is the residue of evolution. As new patterns
> evolve they come into conflict with old ones. Each stage of evolution
> creates in its wake a wash of problems. (Lila 167)
Nothing in this excerpt to suggest the inorganic level is still evolving.
Rather it contradicts Wim's idea that the levels aren't at war.
Best regards,
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 : Thu Mar 25 2004 - 13:10:59 GMT