From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Sat May 29 2004 - 14:55:46 BST
Dear Mark M.,
You suggested 27 May 2004 09:02:28 -0400:
'1. Static Quality may obey its own laws except where such laws would
conflict with DQ.
2. Static Quality must respond to DQ except where such responses would
restrict DQ.
3. Static Quality must protect its own existence as long as such protection
does not conflict with the first or second law.'
I don't agree that DQ is more moral than sq.
Mark 29-5-04: Hello Wim, I agree with you.
Pirsig wrote in his introduction to Lila's Child:
'After reading through these and many other comments, I've concluded that
the biggest improvement I could make in the MOQ would be to block the notion
that the MOQ claims to be a quick fix for every moral problem in the
universe. I have never seen it that way. The image in my mind as I wrote it
was of a large football field that gave meaning to the game by telling you
who was on the 20-yard line but did not decide which team would win. That
was the point of the two opposing arguments over the death penalty described
in Lila. That was the point of the equilibrium between static and Dynamic
Quality. Both are moral arguments. Both can claim the MOQ for support.'
Mark 29-5-04: Superb Wim. I suppose this is where coherence comes in?
Coherence is SQ-SQ tension; the point where evolution pushes forward. The MOQ gives
us excellent 20-20 hindsight, as i like to put it, but when Mark H comes along
and tries to use the MOQ as a crystal ball, who am i to stop him? I was merely
trying to help him.
Next to your suggestion I would suggest as equally valid:
1. Dynamic Quality may create new patterns of value except where
this -measured by standards of Static Quality- would imply degeneration
(i.e. substituting better patterns of value with worse ones).
2. Dynamic Quality must respect existing standards of Static Quality.
3. Dynamic Quality must claim room for change of and relative freedom from
static patterns of value, but only there where this change doesn't endanger
the highest quality static patterns of value existing.
With friendly greetings,
Wim
Mark 29-5-04: I like this Wim. I feel you and i both understand that sinners
and saints may equally appear degenerate? This makes looking ahead very
difficult?
But as i say, if Mark H wishes to have a stab at it, then good luck to him.
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 -
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 29 2004 - 20:29:50 BST