KO, Krimel, et al:. The universe exhibits purpose in every bug that crawls, every bird that flies and everyone who posts to moq_discuss. It seems never to occur to those who are enamored of a materialistic worldview that they were created by the universe, are part and parcel of it, and exhibit purpose with every breath they take.
Platt > -KO > 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. > > [Krimel] > What Pirsig seems want in his account of evolution is similar to what he > wants when talking about iron filings having a "preference". He wants a > universe filled with purpose and free will, a universe that can in some > sense be held morally accountable. > > One of the great tragedies of my life occurred when I was about four. My > lifelong friend and companion TaBee had to be thrown away. As he lingers > in > my memory, he was maybe 10 inches tall, black and white and dingy. I > presume > that at some stage, outside of my ability to recall, he was clean and > fuzzy > and cuddly. I had cuddled him into baldness but even as his fur wore > away > and he lost an eye, he was my best friend. It was a harsh lesson > learning > that my best friend was not alive. He had no feelings. He could not talk > back. He was immune to pain and had no sense of humor. My parents bought > me > a puppy but we lived in a city and the puppy ran out to the road. That > was > that. In the end the "death" of TaBee was harder than the death of that > nameless pup. Sadly, no amount of rationalization then or now can > breathe > life and purpose into an iron filing or a teddy bear. > > -KO > 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. > > [Krimel] > We as creatures find it much easier to relate to other creatures. > Preference > and intention are so integral to our nature that we see them in > everything. > When my computer acts funky, and what computer doesn't, I swear at it. > But > this is just metaphorical. My laptop, which has replaced the bygone TaBee > as > my new best friend, does many things that are in fact "lifelike". I talk > about it thinking and taking its own sweet time. But that is just the > echo > of my inner child. Any philosophy that attempts to imbue the universe > with > purpose and intent is just regressing to the intellectual equivalent of > sucking its thumb. > > But the problem with this regression runs deeper. To use your example, > let's > say my genes and the cells that comprise me are all agents of free will > with > desires and preferences all their own. Those desires and purposes have > almost nothing to do with me. My purposes and desires may be completely > at > odds with those of my genes. I might get a vasectomy and my genes can > just > blow it out their tiny spiraled asses. When I desire to drink too much, > my > brain cells are sacrificed like prisoners of war on an Aztec holy day. > My > purposes and desires take precedence over my cells and genes. Or if they > decide to run amok and cluster into malignant tumors, their hopes and > dreams > can put an end to mine. There is little or no overlap. > > We have a long history of reading purpose and intent into the inanimate > world. Ancient peoples made gods and goddess of forces of nature but in > the > end those forces are so capricious and at odds with human purpose that > the > tales of their deeds wind up sounding ironic. Whatever purpose and > consciousness the timeless universe might have I am pretty sure it has > nothing good to do with me. Seeing it as alive and intentional might help > me > feel kinship to it. It might give me some emotional security or the hope > that if I can relate to it well enough I can sway its judgments and bend > its > will to mine. Like everyone else I am drawn to the Myth of Control. If I > cannot control my fate perhaps I can suck up to the powers that do. > > It has been a hard lesson for humanity to shake loose of this illusion > of > consciousness in the inanimate world. I think it is childish to try to > resurrect it. > > [KO] > 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'. > > [Krimel] > Right, there is that watered down version of teleology that would > classify > the Heat Death as teleology. Unfortunately I don't think that is the kind > of > teleology Pirsig is seeking to prop up. I think he is trying to construct > a > philosophical thumb to suck. > > But don't let me get away with ignoring your point about the illusory > "I". > "I" just don't have time for that ATM. 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/
