Platt, Arlo, So perhaps I could put it this way ...
Clearly there are levels - patterns better than others - within levels. But the key thing here is if and how that difference is "experienced" by the participants. A "higher evolved" participant with patterns above the current level (biological in your example) can use those patterns (social & intellectual) to discern significant differences in the current level. Bearwise, food is food, fish or berries. Higher-intelligence-wise (human if you like) the difference is apparent, due to the higher patterns available. (Personally I see the four proposed levels much less fundamental that Pirsig suggests, as you already know - my onion skins adage - everything comes in three levels, even the levels - ad infinitum ... but it doesn't change the principle above.) Ian On 2/26/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting Arlo Bensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > [Platt] > > Apparently from the vantage point of the inorganic and biological > > levels their patterns can do no wrong. Is that true for the higher > > levels as well? > > > > [Arlo] > > Can you think of any activity that is 'immoral" or "wrong" that is so > > not because of a level conflict? > > Yes. I gave the example Pirsig gave that you deny as you explained below. > > [Arlo] > > Are you suggesting there can be an "immoral biological pattern of values"? > > No. But if there are no immoral patterns within a level as you suggest, then > I presume one intellectual pattern is just as good as another. > > > [Platt] > > Doesn't Pirsig suggest there's also a scale of morality within a level? > > > > [Arlo] > > Pirsig brings "man" into the equation (man eating beef versus > > lettuce), and I think confuses the issue. Consider this, is it > > "immoral" for a bear to eat a fish when it could be eating berries? I > > think in Pirsig's example, "man" makes the issue about an > > intellectual awareness of the MOQ versus biological satiation of > > hunger. Because man "knows" that fish are more evolved than berries, > > it would be immoral for him to eat the fish when berries are > > bountiful. As such, I think this pulls the issue back into a conflict > > of levels issue, and not something that is an "immoral pattern within > > any particular level". > > Is it possible to leave "man" out of the MOQ? > > Would you say that from a social level view that all social patterns are > equally moral? > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ > 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/
