Bo calling Marsha and Andrè. 29 Jan.:
Marsha to Bo: > A pattern has a coming and a going. Its strength is based on its > relationship with other patterns. It has attributes and aggregates > which are also patterns. It is most probably an aggregate to another > pattern. It is in a constant state of change. > Please explain how static patterns of value are independent and > 'exist very much in themselves'. Please do not use the SOL because it > has not been sanctioned by anyone. Andre comes in from the cold: > If Quality (experience) is the fundamental building block of the world > and it is accepted that the MoQ combines the four levels of patterns > within an evolutionary hierarchy I would suggest firstly that the four > levels are 'expressions' of different evolutionary phases of Quality. > The inorganic being the 'oldest', the intellectual pattern the most > 'recent'. Agree with Andrè. I guess Marsha's about the levels not existing .. etc. stems from Pirsig's "Quality/Theories about Quality" super- metaphysics.that overrides the MOQ. If we stick to MOQ's DQ/SQ as realitys fundamental split (there only are dualisms in this world) the levels are as real as reality comes. And this has nothing to do with the SOL which only concerns the intellectual level. > 'Though each level of patterns have emerged from the one below, each > one follows its own rules i.e. there are physical laws such as gravity > (inorganic), the laws of the jungle (biology), co-operation between > animals (society), and the ideas of freedom and rights (intellect). It > is important to note that the different laws of the four static levels > often clash e.g. adultery (a biological good for one's species) v. > family stability (a social good)'. ( McWatt, The Role of > Evolution,Time and Order etc, 1999). More agreement. > I must also add that these are concepts (about reality) and should not > be confused with reality itself. In this way it must be understood > that a pattern of 'static quality' is abstracted from the 'continually > changing flux of immediate experience'(DQ). But this I protest. All efforts to postulate a reality outside THIS kind of language it is vanity. I say "this kind" meaning in a SOM context where language is subjective in contrast to an objective something outside it, but note language may perfectly well be used in MOQ's non-SOM context as a social patterns. > 'By "static quality" Pirsig isn't referring to anything that lacks > movement in the Newtonian sense of the word An important observation. > ......or "intellectual" (e.g. thoughts, ideas). This is from Anthony's Paper, where intellectual patterns are "thoughts, ideas ..." something the SOL goes against. People of old (social level) were as intelligent as ourselves and made up complicated theories about existence, this a a result of much mental effort, The point is that the 3rd. level people did not recognize thoughts and/or ideas as different from reality - that their myths were just myths - this S/O split is intellect's immense value. Have you noticed, one moment I damn intellect's S/O, the next I praise it? But this is MOQ's dilemma. Intellect its its highest static value, yet that which prevents so many from entering the MOQ. Bo 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/
