> Magnus said to Krimel and DMB: > ...Anyway, if you happen to read this, I'm "actually" with Krimel on this > one. I don't think Pirsig has any good reasons to limit the social level > to only humans. DMB, you seems to only take his word for it but have you > really thought about what the social level is? Have you thought of any way > to make a metaphysically relevant? As you describe it, the MoQ becomes > almost as human centric as Ham's theories. > > dmb says: > For whatever its worth, I do usually read your posts and, based on your > recent claim that the inside of a cell is a society, figured you'd > disagree with me on this. And yes, of course I have thought about what the > social level is. And yes, I do take Pirsig's word on what Pirsig means by > the term "social". If we extend the term down to the biological level it > no longer has the same meaning and we've only erased a useful distinction. > I'd say this is relevant intellectually, if that's what you mean by > metaphysically relevant. I mean, these descriptions and distinctions are > just Pirsig's way of carving up experience. They're not supposed to be > absolute or objectively true or any such thing. But they do have to be > coherent and consistent with the MOQ as a whole and I think that expanding > the definition of the social to include the non-human world is destructive > of that coherence and consistency. If cells counted as social, for > example, we might expect intellect to emerge from a cell and it otherwise > makes the system fairly ridiculous.
Platt says: Because dmb and I disagree so violently politically, he probably regards the fact that I agree with his interpretation of the MOQ as expressed in his posts to Krimel and to Magnus (above) as unwelcome. Nevertheless, I think he is on the money. As for the evolution of the levels and their independence, the following from Pirsig sums it up well: (letter from Robert Pirsig to Anthony McWatt, May 3rd, 1997) "i.e. preference is seen as being on a continuum rather than suddenly manifesting itself at the human level. In the MOQ, the higher up the evolutionary ladder you go (from sub-atomic particles to people) the more freedom you have in making preferences. This is why generally a person's experience will be that much richer and complex than a dog's while the dog's experience will be that much better than a tree's which will be better than a piece of rock's and so on." The driving force of evolution is DQ, i.e., freedom. The preserving force is SQ, i.e., harmony. From an MOQ perspective, the levels are discreet by their harmony. 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/
