[Arlo had asked] If animals could respond to DQ in the past (DQ-animals), (1) what was the nature of this ability? what could they do?, (2) was there ever an overlap, a time when both DQ-animals and DQ-man walked the earth together? Or did DQ-animals in North America "lose" their DQ-ness when DQ-man appears in Africa? (3) was there ever a time when NOTHING on the earth could respond to DQ? Before "man", was it always that something, somewhere could respond to DQ? During the time of the dinosaurs, for example, what was DQ-enabled? T-rex? Lemurs? Ferns? (4) Extending that, before the era of animals, is your proposal that "plants" could respond to DQ? If not, what? If so, what is the nature of how those plants could "act" that they can no longer do? (5) When "cats", to use one example, could respond to DQ (DQ-cats), what could they do then that they can no longer do now? Again, speculate. Did they have "free will" when they were DQ-cats? And, importantly (6) why did DQ-animals lose their ability? If they could respond to DQ, what made them stop? Is your assumption that humans could one day "lose" the ability to respond to DQ? If not, why not?
Take a crack at any of these. Speculate. Guess. I don't think it'll be easy, I think the absurdity of the claim that "only man" responds to DQ is evident here. [Arlo now] Please try to answer, speculate, guess, expand upon, whatever, any of these questions. [Platt] If you think the claim is absurd, fine. I think Pirsig makes it clear that the evolution of the physical and biological levels took place at the atomic and molecular levels... [Arlo] But you said "animals could at one time respond to DQ". That's not "molecular". [Platt] and states that now "only a living being" can respond to DQ... [Arlo] The examples you cite are clearly responses to DQ contained in the social and/or intellectual repertoire of responses. An atom or a molecule can't "hear a great song for the first time". And this underscores my point. I think Pirsig was sloppy with this. Responding to DQ, a "sense of betterness", occurs at all the MOQ's levels. However, each level contains constraints on how patterns can respond. Pirsig would be much clearer had he said "only a living being can respond socially to DQ, and only "man" can respond intellectually to DQ". That makes perfect sense, and bypasses all the absurdities as evidenced by the questions above (which you keep avoiding). [Platt] Again, if you think dice as well as rocks, ropes and roads respond to DQ, fine. Just don't be surprised at the laughter coming from the back row of your class. [Arlo] A die can respond to DQ only from within the inorganic repertoire of responses. It can't laugh, it can't cry or think or ponder or paint or talk or dream or symbolically represent the experience. As for laughter, one would hope those who would laugh who take a crack at answering any of the questions above, only then would they earn the right to laugh. So, have at it. Answer any of them. Give yourself laughing rights. If your position is not absurd, speculating about any of them should be easy. 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/
