He goes on...
"Noether's theorem, the conservation of energy is a consequence of the
fact that the laws of physics do not change over time."
[Ham]
If that is true, then the laws of physics cannot be proven false, which
puts physical science in the same class as the religion Mr. Pirsig
demeans. I think you'll find that quite a few laws of physics have at
least been modified, even since Einstein's time.
[Ron]
you are correct, Pirsig does put physical science in the same class as
religeon in regard to this.
Noether's theorem is a mathmatical anomalie which hints at the possible
nature of energy, I can
only base my theories on observances which is all any of us can do.I do
not hold to this theory
absolutly but it is interesting and supports the theory of energy being
infinite.
[Ron]
"Dualism dissolves in the light of this theory for all (including space
and
consciousness) is
energy."
[Ham]
So Mind, Matter, and Reality are all energy. I guess that includes
Quality as well!
[Ron]
sure
[Ham]
Once again, this is not a philosopher talking; it's an evolutionist who
likes to paint existence in nice-sounding cliches that make us feel good
about reality. I, for one, will not buy into the theory that reality is
fundamentally a Goodness called energy, no matter how simple it sounds.
[Ron]
See, this is what I did'nt like about Moq either, is the interpretation
of reality being fundementally
a goodness called energy, that the universe is a moral order of
betterness because betterness is
relative is'nt it? better for who? better for what? Ham, all I have to
offer is this quote to
try to explain Pirsigs theory Perhaps your assesment of him being merely
an evolutionist is
correct perhaps he paints goodness as natural phenomena.
"Good is conformity to an established pattern of fixed values and value
objects". Lila 119
"Regarding dynamic quality, its place in Pirsig's moral system is quite
simple; it is the good. The more dynamic a static pattern is, the
better.. .the more moral it is. In terms of static patterns the dynamic
represents freedom from other static patterns (Pirsig, 1991, 307).
Dewey's equivalent concept is that of adaptation to the environment.
Life, for Dewey, is growth, not growth toward an end, (but growth as an
end in itself. The ability to adapt (for Pirsig - the dynamic aspect of
a static biological pattern) is that which enables growth (Thayer, 1973,
119), thus he says The process of growth, of improvement and progress
rather than the static outcome and result, becomes the significant
thing. Not health as an end fixed once for all, but the needed
improvement in health - a continual process - is the end and good. The
end is no longer a terminus or limit to be reached. It is the active
process of transforming the existent situation. Not perfection as a
final goal, but the ever-enduring process of perfecting, maturing,
refining is the aim of living. Honesty, industry, temperance, justice,
like health, wealth and learning, are not goods to be possessed as they
would be if they expressed fixed ends to be attained. They are
directions of change in the quality of experience. Growth itself is the
only moral "end." (Dewey, 1920, in Thayer, 1973, 142)
When Pirsig states that: All life is a migration of static patterns of
quality toward Dynamic Quality. (Pirsig, 1991, 143) he means precisely
what Dewey meant. Dynamic quality is an end, the end toward which life
is heading, but, by definition, it is not a fixed, static end. It is
change itself that life moves toward. Does Pirsig mean the same thing by
'dynamic quality' as Dewey's emphasis on 'growth'? If we now turn to
Pirsig's concept of evolution we will see that he does, and that they
agree entirely upon what is the only moral "end." In a metaphysics based
on 'substance' change can only be explained as the effect of a prior
cause. Pirsig's Metaphysics of Quality replaces 'cause' with 'value'
(Pirsig, 1991, 107) and so reverses the picture;
For Pirsig the supreme good is actually dynamic quality, but, in terms
of static patterns of quality - of things that exist in the world, he
would agree entirely with Peirce; in terms of static patterns evolution
is morality. However they disagree upon the nature of that process -
Pirsig agrees with Dewey that there is no fixed end but only continuous
change (or - growth)."
Ham, I hope my queries are not irritating you, I am not intending it to.
I value the discussion
and seek stimulating discourse. I'm not going to steadfastly defend MOQ
and bash Essentialism
it would be rude, irrational and of poor form but I am interested in why
others think the way they do.
with that in mind and sans-sarcasim may I ask you what brought you to
MOQ and this forum if
it's theories are that uncorrelative with your own? one would think why
bother with MOQ at all?
thanks Ham
sincerely,
Ron
Good luck to all,
Ham
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
