Hi Platt,
Platt:
In the context of deciding the
morality of executing an individual accused of a capital crime,
Pirsig
wrote:
"And beyond that is an even more compelling reason; societies and
thoughts
and principles themselves are no more than sets of static patterns.
These
patterns can't by themselves perceive or adjust to Dynamic Quality.
Only a
living being can do that. The strongest moral argument against
capital
punishment is that it weakens a society's Dynamic capability-its
capability
for change and evolution." (Lila, 13)
Steve:
The point Pirsig makes with the above is simply that social and
intellectual patterns cannot exist without biological and inorganic
patterns. Intellectual patterns evolve out of social patterns which
evolve out of biological patterns. New thoughts only happen in the
same
way that all other thoughts evolved--on the shoulders of lower level
patterns. Biologically killing a person is not merely the destruction
of a biological pattern but also the destruction of a source of ideas.
But anyway, something about this whole line of discussion seems wrong
to me. We start with experience is Quality and see experience in terms
of dynamic and static aspects of Quality including recognizing
ourselves as an experiencing subject as an idea, an intellectual
pattern that is part of the static aspect of Quality. Then from the
perspective of experiencing subjects we identify other objects like
rocks and classify them as inorganic patterns and ask if they
experience, too. We are no longer in the perspective of radical
empiricism when we ask ourselves what it must be like to be a rock. In
fact, we are about as far removed from that perspective as imaginable.
We are trying to figure out if a rock's experience is also DQ/sq. The
question itself seems to me to be outside the MOQ perspective and may
need to be unasked. Then there is the pragmatic maxim: what are the
consequences of believing that a rock's experience is DQ/sq versus
only
sq?
Platt:
Asking if a rock experiences is a category error. Rocks are heaps
incapable
of experiencing, not wholes like atoms and cells which can experience
at
their own levels.
If it makes more sense to you, substitute "atom" for "rock." All the
questions remain.
Regards,
Steve
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/
