Platt Holden (pholden@worldnet.att.net)
Tue, 28 Oct 1997 05:00:06 +0100
Greetings LS:
Recent posts by Maggie, Diana and Doug have got me SOM thinking (always a
problematic pursuit) about the next level above the intellectual. Pirsig
hints at a such a level, calling it "a code of Art." What does he mean by
"code" and "Art?"
My guess is that Art means what Diana suggests: a synonym for Dynamic
Quality. But as we know, DQ is not a level; it surrounds and pervades all
levels. When Diana says "Art is any endeavor taken to the level that it
becomes an Art," she is suggesting that indeed there is such a thing as a
DQ-like level, not DQ itself, but a level above the intellectual that is
infused with more DQ than levels below, that is, more open, more free, more
encompassing and unifying.
According to my dictionary, the first definition of "code" is "A
systematically arranged and comprehensive collection of laws."
Putting the two together, the next level above the intellect, a code of
Art, would be a comprehensive collection of laws about Quality or simply
Laws of Quality. And what would that be? The Metaphysics of Quality itself.
Recall that Pirsig describes the first three levels as the laws of physics,
the law of the jungle and the laws of society. The intellectual level
contains the laws of mathematics, language and logic. So the Laws of
Quality fits.
Also recall that Doug with huge insight speaks of the importance of
"context" and illustrates it by saying, "In MoQ land …" i.e., a different
territory than occupied by other levels. In MoQ land, you see reality
differently than you do when in the lower levels. But before the
Metaphysics of Quality, MoQ land didn't exist.
How is the MoQ presented? Not as a SOM paper, essay or philosophic treatise
but as a work of art in a novel called LILA. As a work of art, the MoQ is
primarily a static intellectual pattern, while as Art it invokes DQ through
the aesthetic sense. I would be so bold as to assert that all of us on the
LS, to one degree or another, for one fleeting instant or more, have
experienced while reading LILA a Quality Event of high order. That is, a QE
with a preponderance of DO.
For further evidence that the MoQ is the next level up, consider that the
lower levels fight against it. (James McCabe and Doug have brilliantly
explained why.) Not only have social patterns bastardized the meaning of
"quality," associating it with the white, heterosexual European male
worldview and all the supposed social evils thereof, but the intellectual
level ridicules the idea that the world is a moral order, employing such
vitriolic language as found in the two critical reviews on the
Forum--brazen attempts to intimidate the curious into apathy and silence.
(The fights for dominance among levels can indeed be vicious.)
Finally, recall the enthusiasm with which Pirsig greeted the LS and the
static latch required for any new level to survive. I suspect Pirsig
intuitively knows that his MoQ is the next level and desperately seeks the
necessary static latch. And friends, I suggest we are it.
As I said at the outset, SOM thinking is problematic. Has it led me astray
in this case? Your comments would be much appreciated.
Platt
-- post message - mailto:skwok@spark.net.hk unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:06 CEST