Platt Holden
Fri, 6 Aug 1999 06:31:45 -0700
Hi Rich and Group: On behalf of those who, like me, see the Metaphysics of Quality supporting the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum physics, I offer the following from the book, “Taking the Quantum Leap” by Fred Alan Wolf: “According to the tenets of the complementarity principle, there is no reality until that reality is perceived.” This corresponds to Pirsig's belief that primary reality is an empirical perception. Rich has pointed out that “the word ‘experience' has always implied the existence of an experiencER and that which is experiencED.” Likewise, in our dualistic language, the word “perception” implies a perceiver and a perceived. The implicit question left hanging when one uses the word "perception” is “perception by whom of what?” For most people, primary reality is thought to be a perception of an object of some kind located “out there” in physical or mental space -- a structure, theory, photon, map, self, etc. For Pirsig, primary reality is a perception of Quality, something which you, being a pattern of, are already. For most people, the “by whom” is a living creature of some kind although to quantum physicists the “whom” is still a matter of debate Some say it must be a human being. Others argue that it could just as well be a robot. For Pirsig, the “whom” is any pattern of value -- human, animal, robot or rock. In a letter to Anthony McWatt, Pirsig wrote: "In the MOQ, the higher up the evolutionary ladder you go (from sub- atomic particles to people) the more freedom you have in making preferences. This is why generally a person’s experience will be that much richer and complex than a dog's while the dog's experience will be that much better than a tree's which will be better than a piece of rock's and so on." For Pirsig, perception occurs at all levels. What these patterns perceive expands as you go up the ladder. A human pattern of value perceives more patterns of value than a fish pattern of value. So if I'm getting Pirsig's meaning right, primary reality in the MOQ consists of some patterns of value observing other patterns of value. But there's really no difference because “patterns of value” are intellectual concepts that are derived from and are secondary to the perceptions themselves. In other words, what see is you-seeing, and what you are is your perceptions. If your talking about ultimate or primary reality, there really isn't anything else except you. That's why I claim, “Mine is the only world.” But if you're talking about secondary, “scientific” reality, then the subject/object, mind/matter, me/others outlook works reasonably well except for a couple of huge philosophical problems. It doesn't explain values. It doesn't explain why life should be opposed to physical forces. It doesn't solve all those platypi that Pirsig brought up in Lila. Until the proponents of dualistic reality can come up with convincing answers to those questions (and explain quantum weirdness), their arguments will always come up short. Platt MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]