Hi Platt, Arlo --
[Platt]
How else could animals respond other than at the molecular level?
[Arlo]
So now your claim is that only the cat's molecules responded at
one point to DQ, but not the cat. Is that correct?
[Platt]
Do you think a cat responds to DQ? If so, how would you know?
What would a cat do to demonstrate such a response?
[Arlo]
Anytime a cat responds to "it's better here" it is responding to DQ. A
cat,
however, can only respond biologically to DQ, so it lacks the social and
intellectual repertoire of responses "man" has available.
[Platt]
A cat's response to betterness is simply a result of a cat's
preprogrammed value system we normally call instinct.
It's a static pattern having no ability to respond to the creative
"source of all things" and the "cutting edge of progress."
Pirsig warned against what you apparently support -- making
biological quality equivalent to Dynamic Quality. But since you
disagree with him on so many issues, this comes as no surprise.
I've followed this dialogue with interest, hoping that one of you would see
the confusion that Pirsig's terms have caused in your arguments. As I
understand it, Dynamic Quality is Value in the absolute metaphysical sense,
while Static Quality is a reference to particular (i.e. relative) values.
If my interpretation is correct, then we needn't speak of DQ as having
anything to do with choices or preferences as exhibited by inorganic or
organic entities, inasmuch as no finite organism experiences it. Existence
is a relational system, and the sense of value in this world is always
relative with respect to the individual organism.
Response, as you are both using the world, represents behavior. Thus, the
rock that rolls down the hill responds to the force of gravity, not to value
or quality. Electrons circle the nucleus of an atom according to physical
laws, not because they value a positive charge. On the other hand, a dog
will growl if threatened by another creature. This is an instinctive
response to danger, which may be perceived as a "negative" value. Likewise,
a cat may exhibit a preference for raw fish rather than meat, again because
of the nutritive value of this food to its organic well-being. As Platt
points out, these "deterministic" values are indigenous to the
"preprogrammed value system we normally call instinct."
Only man has the discriminative sensibility and judgment to choose value as
an aesthetic, moral, or rational motive for action. Yes, that makes man
"special". It also affords him a purpose for living beyond the biological
goals of self-defense, propagation, and survival of the species. As for the
order of the universe, and the laws that govern it, these are of value to
intelligent creatures who can use such principles to their advantage.
Whatever teleology we ascribe to evolution and the physical world comes from
man's innate value sensibility, not from some "higher level of intellect"
called DQ. Man's mind and feelings are uniquely attracted to order and
symmetry in the universe, which is what makes him a valuistic creature.
If there is an intelligent design to the universe, it is man's value sense
that gives it being. As Platt knows, I maintain that objective reality as
we know it is the product of human experience. It is a reality that
represents the (pre-intellectual) values that man differentiates,
intellectualizes, and actualizes as 'being-in-the-world'. Quantitatively it
is the same for all of us; qualitatively, however, it is a proprietary
experience. Hegel called experience "appearance" and explained it as a
double-negation -- "the negation of the negation of Being." He was talking
about the negation of otherness performed by the negated self, as opposed to
the primary negation which is the denial of nothingness that actualizes
existence as a dichotomy. Man brings value into existence as differentiated
being, and the "music of the spheres" represents the values to which he is
attuned. That's why I've insisted that existence is an anthropocentric
reality.
As you see, I don't claim adherence to Pirsig's philosophy. But please
don't let my ideas interfere with your debate.
Best regards,
Ham
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/
