Hi Krimel, in Chapter 11 i think Pirsig offers the MoQ as both an underpinning of evolutionary theory and as a philosophical explanation of teleology, and i can accept both: there is virtual teleology in human life. When i am between the horns of a dilemma it does not make sense to say that all those transient quarks that momentarily comprise me are working together on my behalf to find a solution to my problem - its only slightly more understandable to consider that all my genes are together busy calculating to help me; no, it really only makes proper sense to say that 'I', the complete individual, is trying to come to a decision. In this sense, i think, we do have purpose and intention. All this not withstanding the fact that there is no detectable trace of a wispy 'I' pervading my brain or body and therefore that 'I' is really illusory along with any will-power i appear to have. The wikipedia page on Teleology refers to this viewpoint as 'intrinsic finality'.
-KO 2009/4/16 Krimel <[email protected]> > dmb, > > Sorry about the previous blank message; my thumb hit the stupid pad on the > laptop and it went crazy. I usually leave it turned off. Anyway I would > have > responded earlier but it took the EMTs awhile to restart my heart after > reading that you sort of agreed with me. > > I have always thought this is an important point. The MoQ does add a > metaphysical underpinning for evolutionary theory. Both are about how > stability arises and persists in the face of dynamic change. Or to put it > more boldly how Order arises from Chaos. This is the most basic and > fundamental theme in both the Mythos and the Logos. The reason evolutionary > theory is so pervasive and crosses so many disciplines is that it addresses > this theme. This is what gives evolutionary theory its elegance, beauty and > power. I am always disappointed when Chapter 11 comes up because in it > Pirsig shows he does not appreciate the power of evolutionary thinking nor > how the MoQ really serves to enhance it. His focus on betterness and > acceptance of a teleological account of evolution contribute mightily to > keeping the MoQ on the fringe. Pirsig's errors on the other hand are not in > the same ballpark as Wilbur's acceptance of intelligent design. > > I too am attracted to the Eastern emphasis on process rather that things. > But I still have to admit that I get a better understanding of this from > Whitehead than from Eastern writers. When I read Eastern works I feel like > I > am eavesdropping. It's kind of like I am attracted to the Jewish religion > but I could never really be a Jew. That is something you have to be born > into to really understand. In addition the more I read of Eastern thinking > the more I see that like western thinking there are factions and subtexts > and internal arguments and that any characterization of "Eastern Thinking" > is as much an over simplification as talking about "Western Thinking". Both > are rich enough and diverse enough to resist being lump together as one > entity. > > Krimel > > > > > ____________________________________________ > > Krimel said to Marsha: > ...the explosion of new applications of evolutionary theory that you cite > is > clear evidence of the dynamic quality of the theory. It is static patterns > that often give rise to ever more interesting examples of dynamic quality. > For example language is entirely composed of static pattern and yet out of > it grow that infinite generativity of speech and writing. It is in fact the > presence of static patterns that give rise to ever more astounding examples > of dynamic quality. > > > dmb says: > Hey, here's something marvelous and rare. I agree with you. The explosion > of > applications isn't just evidence of the dynamic quality of the theory, > though. It is also evidence for the theory of dynamic quality. I mean, the > fact that evolutionary theory can be applied so widely supports the MOQ's > expansion to include literally everything. As the old SNL fake news joke > shows, the process of evolution operates differently in areas outside > biology. "The world's leading evolutionary biologist died today... And was > replaced by a larger, stronger evolutionary biologist." Or to use your > example, words themselves don't strive to survive by tooth and claw and yet > the theory can be adapted to language. Some scientists already describe the > unfolding of the physical universe in terms of evolution and they do so, I > suppose, without any help from the MOQ. Seems like things are generally > moving in that direction and the diversity of applications will probably > continue to grow. > In a Alan Watts podcast I heard recently, he explained that the East and > West are divided by a difference in their basic conceptions of how the > world > came to be. We in the West have what's called a "ceramic" conception of > creation, where inert stuff is shaped or made as a potter does. God is the > creator and we are among the created things. You know, Adam was made from > the dust. In this conception reality is a collection of artifacts. Made by > who and for what purpose? In the East, reality isn't a collection of nouns. > Its a verb. Creatures aren't made. They come into being through action, > through processes in which they are actors. Reality is a dance, not a > structure. It comes to be from within, so to speak, rather than being > manufactured by something outside itself. I mention this because I think > the > MOQ's expansion of evolution to include literally everything fits more > comfortably with the Eastern conception. Imagine Darwinism in that context > and that'd be close to the what the MOQ is saying. Or so it seems to me. > > > > 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/ > 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/
