> [Platt] > To clarify, can you give an example of a pair of dice responding to DQ? > > [Arlo] > Try standing one on its edge. Its response is constrained (and afforded) by > the > fact that it exists no higher than the inorganic level (not biological, social > or intellectual), but when it falls it does so because doing so is "better"... > DQ.
I asked about a pair of dice. But, nevermind. Assuming you can place a dice on edge, when it falls it's responding to gravity, a gust of wind or some other physical phenomena, not DQ. If it decided on its own to stand itself on edge, then I would admit it responded to DQ. > But to clarify your position, everything in the cosmos is subject to > deterministic law except for "man", is that correct? Everything your cat does > can be mapped out and projected ahead of time. Only "man" is exempt from such > determinism. I want to make sure that this is what you are saying before I > continue. That's not what I am saying. I am saying that everything in the universe is subject to the laws of physics (mostly predictable), or of biology (somewhat predictable), or if human of society (occasionally predictable) or of intellect (rarely predictable unless a pattern of logic and/or mathematics). Our ability to predict is limited by our knowledge which is always incomplete. Thus, our reliance on chance and probability. But if you are referring, as Pirsig does, to the issue of human free will vs. determinism, then only humans have free will to the "extent one follows Dynamic Quality." (Lila, 12). 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/
