Craig, Steve, Matt (stealthy) Peter, All.
On 19 Dec. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [Pirsig, courtesy Steve]
"A conventional subject-object metaphysics uses the
same four static patterns as the Metaphysics of Quality,
dividing them into two groups of two: inorganic-biological
patterns called "matter," and social- intellectual patterns
called "mind."...Everything has got to be object or subject,
substance or non-substance, because that's the primary
division of the universe. Inorganic-biological patterns are
composed of "substance," and are therefore "objective."
Social-intellectual patterns are not composed of
"substance" and are therefore called "subjective."
(Bo)
It's dubious if SOM "uses the same static patterns" - possibly the
same terms - but no one would say that life is "matter" or that a
society only exist "in our minds". This way of combining the
levels in pairs is Pirsig's method of "encasing" SOM, but is IMO
awkward and lets SOM in by the back door. The MOQ encases
SOM by making it its own 4th. level.
(Craig)
> Is the mind/matter distinction the same as the subjective/objective?
> Or are the distinctions the same within MOQ but not within SOM?
(Bo)
I continue in the SOL vein: The intellectual level is the S/O
distinction or aggregate plus all its derivatives. Within SOM
however (which is the said level while it was a metaphysics) there
are/were only subjects AND objects, mind AND matter ...etc.
because SOM never saw these as connected, they were separate
universes.
> [Pirsig, via Steve again]
"So what the Metaphysics of Quality concludes is that all
schools are right on the mind-matter question. Mind is
contained in static inorganic patterns. Matter is contained
in static intellectual patterns." > This has always seemed
a slip of the tongue to me. Does anyone else > think so?
Craig
(Bo)
The whole passage goes like this: (digital LILA p.104)
In a value-centered Metaphysics of Quality the four sets
of static patterns are not isolated into separate
compartments of mind and matter. Matter is just a name
for certain inorganic value patterns. Biological patterns,
social patterns, and intellectual patterns are supported by
this pattern of matter but are independent of it. They
have rules and laws of their own that are not derivable
from the rules or laws of substance. This is not the
customary way of thinking, but, when you stop to think
about it you wonder how you ever got conned into
thinking otherwise.
Till here everything is fine: each level grows out of the former, its
moral different from its parent yet supported by it, thus all upper
levels would disappear if the inorganic level collapsed
What, after all, is the likelihood that an atom possesses
within its own structure enough information to build the
city of New York?
This looks a bit uncalled-for, but he goes on:
Biological and social and intellectual patterns are not the
possession of substance. The laws that create and
destroy these patterns are not the laws of electrons and
protons and other elementary particles. The forces that
create and destroy these patterns are the forces of value.
This is plain sailing, we are now so Quality versed that it may
look a bit superfluous, but it was written while no-one had heard
about the MOQ.
So what the Metaphysics of Quality concludes is that all
schools are right on the mind-matter question. Mind is
contained in static inorganic patterns. Matter is contained
in static intellectual patterns. Both mind and matter are
completely separate evolutionary levels of static patterns
of value, and as such are capable of each containing the
other without contradiction.
This is the start of how the MOQ solves the mind/matter paradox
(based on the said method of "encasement" which is awkward.
The SOL on the other hand meets the Occam Razor
requirements of simplicity by declaring all paradoxes results of
intellect's former SOM position. As the 4th level they dissolves.
IMO
Bo
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/
