dmb says: ..static patterns preserve our world, preserve the advances that have been dynamically generated in the past and they constitute our very being. Sure, static patterns can be too rigid or too dominant, but they are entirely necessary.
squonk: Hi David, This description of what?exists?and how it came to be is the moq as stated in Lila. The thought experiment takes this as its starting conditions and?asks if an imagined scenario?is moral. dmb says: I think when Pirsig says some static patterns are more dynamic than others he's referring to the basic idea behind the hierarchy of levels. You know, the four levels of static patterns and then the code of art on top of that, which more directly involves DQ. squonk: Not exclusively: Sexual choice (biological pattern) is more dynamic than cell replication (biological pattern) for example. Either way, the?nature of how some 'static patterns' can be 'more dynamic' than other static patterns is not explored in any detail. There are some hints: ever increasing diversity seems to be a good thing. Also, the term 'dynamic'?when predicating static patterns, and the term 'Dynamic' when predicating Quality are not used the same way. The thought experiment hoped to explore these issues because i don't think the phrase dynamic pattern is actually used in Lila, although it seems to be inferred. dmb says: All of that static stuff has to be in place and more or less functioning before there's any kind of developmental growth, innovation, inspiration or whatever. Mystical experience, evolutionary changes and creativity and the other DQ events can't be treated as easily as those ranked static levels. squonk: I've swapped the above sentences around because I'm finding it difficult to make sense of a connection between them and it seems they make more sense this way. The first as they are now makes the basic moq assertion that static patterns evolve. (DQ does not evolve, only static patterns evolve.) I am not sure what you mean by DQ event. I take the view that a Carbon atom experiences DQ as a mystical experience which is in its own way comparable to that?experienced by people: Lila explores how it is that we experience DQ differently, DQ doesn't evolve (DQ simply is, one can't have more or less of it) it is the static filters?which evolve, so they can experience DQ with different (increasing) intensity. A Carbon atom is a static structure which experiences DQ in its own way - it is its own filter for DQ. As such, it may be possible to rank DQ events as experienced by static filters because it could be argued that more evolved filters experience DQ more intensly. dmb says: It is not that we can do without a mind or sense organs. They are necessary but insufficient conditions of this "art". I mean, if mystical experience is a mind-blowing event and you think its important to have that experience, then the first thing to do is get a mind. squonk: This may hinge on the what makes some static patterns more dynamic than others question. There seems to be an irony in that getting a mind and having a mystical experience with that mind?disrupts the patterns which constitute the mind in the first place. At least, descriptions of what happens seem to agree with this. Coupled with the observation that pre linguistic babies are in a state of bliss seems to describe the state a mind experiencing a mystical experience returns to, or assumes. Why not simply allow the pre linguistic state to persevere? If mystical experience is a mind-blowing event and you think its important to have that experience then why bother getting a mind in the first place if you are only going to do your best to?assume the pre linguistic stage anyway? Babies need parents in order to survive, but for the first time in the evolution of static patterns technology could, theoretically, replace parents and maintain the pre linguistic state without any danger. squonk 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/
