Krimel said: I agree completely here. It seems to me that Platt and dmb are attempting to read choice and intention into even the inorganic level. I don't see how this differs from theology in the least. Platt sneers a chance but at least acknowledges some kind of vague theological convictions. Dave, just pretends that whatever it is he is saying, it is not theology.
Andre: A few posts ago I quoted Pirsig at lenght in the light of the chemistry professor analogy. First things first: DQ is not 'chance', nor 'intent' , nor 'poof'' ,nor anything teleological in the theological sense. It is the undifferentiated aesthetic continuum. [Krimel] OK, as far as DQ is concerned we are in two thirds agreement. I think Dynamic means change, chance, uncertainty. I really do not see how imputing intention and volition into the inorganic level can be seen as anything other than theology. But maybe you have some sense of why it is not. [Andre] Secondly. positing a 'thread' as the 'ineffable' before anything else..., positing this from growing up/and reflecting on 20th Century, American society (and history in general), Pirsig saw a morality, a something towards betterness, a something towards freedom from, and he called this Quality. [Krimel] But a sense of "betterness" does not guarantee the "betterness" will follow. The last 30 years of American politics, in which some dream of laisse fair capitalism was touted as the ultimate betterness should serve as proof of that. In the pursuit of that vision of betterness the expanding social gap between rich and poor threatened to turn us into a feudal society and in the end it produced the current economic collapse. [Andre] This can only be done in hindsight. Because, as Pirsig says himself, all our intellectualisations after the Q-experience are based on analogues, memories and memories, analogues etc etc. [Krimel] And as noted these can all prove to be wrong. In fact they are all notoriously unrealiable. [Andre] Again I ask, how do you tell the brujo, be it photon. atom,cell, human being, intellectual pattern) from its counterpart? I am sure there have been countless counterparts but the ones that have 'survived' are what we have and see/experience ( perhaps not appreciate [low quality] but that is beside the point). [Krimel] Exactly, what survives in not necessarily better than what preceded it. [Andre] Pirsig also stating that the MoQ starts with sentience, can be understood in the way that pre-sentience responses to DQ followed strict sets of, what we have identified as 'laws'( of quantum physics [mathematics] of physics etc), this changes with sentients , our freedom to interpret DQ became greater ( the strict laws of perish or survive do not apply so much anymore), it did not simply entail a choice between survival or not...we are far more advanced that this. [Krimel] Actually I think Pirsig is saying that sentience is derived from experience and I think the MoQ starts with experience. Personally I agree that this is difficult, confusing and possibly wrong. [Andre] What I am getting at is that DQ does't do anything. WE respond to it as we see fit and this depends on our static patterns; our vested interests, how much we have to lose or gain in our isolated psychic cells, and the sizes of our bankaccounts, and the celebrity/or not connections we have with God, Buddha, Paul Newman or the man/woman next door. That makes the difference. We have the intellectual choice, but are very much torn between choices based on biological and or social patterns of value. Bottom line is: the choice is ours, and DQ has no influence in/on this. It only suggests that we act morally, i.e in harmony. [Krimel] Ok, you are saying we have free will. I really want to believe that but I have to say there is a great deal of good evidence to suggest otherwise. I have frequently criticized others here for clinging to beliefs in spite of the evidence solely because the beliefs make them feel good. In this instance I must plead guilty. 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/
