Hi Ham, [Ham] > 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.
I think you're mistaken about DQ. It is part of the Quality (value) experience that creates the world and leaves behind in its wake static patterns of value. For example, from individuals responding to DQ all original ideas and inventions arise, including your Essence philosophy.. > 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." Agree. All the examples you give are emanations from static patterns of value. To claim like Arlo does that rocks, ropes and roads can respond to DQ challenges belief to put it kindly. > 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. I don't think DQ is any "higher level of intellect." Rather, Pirsig describes it as the "pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality." > 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. Always good to get your views, not only because they are interesting, but because you present them without belittling the intelligence of those who disagree with you. Best regards, Platt 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/
