Hi Heather
Heather Perella wrote:
> SA continues:
> Magnus, I understand intellect can analogize the
> other levels, but I think the other levels
> (biological, etc...) are analogies of dynamic quality.
> I also found this quote from ZMM that discusses this
> analogy method of "all things". Pertaining to "...the
> One is the source of all things and includes all
> things in it... since no matter what thing you use to
> define it, the thing will always describe something
> less than the One itself." "All things" are included
> in the One, yet defining in terms of any "thing", such
> as any static pattern on any level, the "thing", such
> as a rock, does not define "the One", which I would
> say "the One" is dynamic quality, which is undefinable
> and each static pattern happens in accord with dynamic
> quality. This goes along with how each static pattern
> experiences, which Marsha said she would try to
> describe this "experiencing" aspect of spov's, but I'm
> not sure if she has or not according to how she views
> this "experience".
>
> I guess it depends on what one means by analogy.
> The way I think about analogy is that dynamic quality
> being the primary reality and static patterns come
> about from dq. Thus, any spov is dq, but to hold the
> integrity of dq's undefinableness any sq coming from
> dq, even inorganic patterns, are not dq, but are dq.
> Are not dq, but are analogies of dq helps provide the
> distinction between spov that are from dq. At least
> that's how I understand this. By the way, this is
> also how intellectual patterns are morally better
> analogies than say inorganic patterns. Yet, the speed
> of evolution on any one level is relative to the
> level, so, in terms of time, lower levels seem to
> involve themselves in very, very good analogies (they
> stick around and every nature lover knows how nature
> can inspire awe throughout ones life-time).
Hmm, wouldn't you agree that what you call dq above is really Quality?
The "One" Pirsig mentioned in the quote (which I removed), is called Quality in
the MoQ. And the first split of that is into DQ and SQ.
Your definition of analogy seems to be very tightly connected to the quality
event, right? So before a quality event, there would be only dq, but after the
event, the subject and object resulting from the QE are analogies of the
original dq? Would that be a fair description?
My version of analogy doesn't involve the dynamic side of quality. It's more
like "An intellectual pattern that represents another pattern of any level".
In fact, I think the revolution of the 4:th level *is* that it's able to do
analogies, to represent other patterns. Lower patterns just are. And each
pattern of lower levels is unique. Only intellectual patterns are able to be an
identical copy of another intellectual pattern.
Sorry to be such a bore and start defining things so strictly. Reading your
writing is much nicer.
Magnus
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/
