Arlo, I think I see your point, but you may be missing the control that is actually there. "You are free to move about the cabin". That means that you are free but your freedom is confined. The exact same thing is seen with Quality (imo), that is, we are free so long as we follow certain rules. Those rules are all around us, from basic forces of physics, to the need to stay alive. So in this sense, almost everything we do is controlled. Our free will comes in only in terms of how to create within that control. Quality provides the broad highway of life, we can switch lanes if we want, but don't drive off the road.
Hold on, got to take a breath, gosh I hate having to do that all the time, but those are the rules... I think this extrapolation of such control into deities or complete loss of free will is unnecessary, and only obfuscates the discussion. Perhaps Quality has a mind like ours, perhaps not. Perhaps there is a plan, or a blueprint, perhaps not. All I can see is that if everything were left purely up to chance, we wouldn't see the world as it is. Chance implies everything is has a possibility of happening or not. If that were the case, creation (in a philosophical sense) would never happen. Yes, there is direction, yes there is control. Can't escape that, the only question is what are the rules and how do we play by them. The game itself is up to us. Mark On Nov 18, 2009, at 9:35:34 AM, "Arlo Bensinger" <[email protected]> wrote: From: "Arlo Bensinger" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [MD] British Emergentism Date: November 18, 2009 9:35:34 AM PST To: [email protected] [Platt] No problem there. But it's clear that your description is just that, a description of what happens, not how or why it happens [Arlo] Willful ignorance. Emergence describes "how". As to "why", emergence, along with the MOQ, posits a why that is planless, un-orchestrated, un-controlled, un-manipulated, and free. Theories of Emergence, I agree, have yet to understand all this occurs as a RESPONSE TO Quality, as Pirsig theorizes. [Platt] As you point out, the MOQ posits Quality, a "controlling force," as a reason for such changes. [Arlo] Quality is no more a "controlling force" than the sun controls the temperature of our planet. There is no willful manipulation, no orchestration, and no intent. A "controlling force" is simply your ongoing theistic drumbeat. What you seem to always miss, is that "control" eliminates "freedom". If Quality "controls" things, then things are not "free", they are mere machinations of Quality's Will. "Control", like the term you propose below "produce", implies not only will and intent, but orchestration and design. All things that pervert the MOQ into a theism, and remove from the MOQ its beautiful core... "freedom to response to DQ". And with this "freedom" inherent in the MOQ's explanation, is "chance". Nothing ever "has to" or "had to" respond in any way with certainty. All things that we see in hindsight were never "certain", they were driven by the appearance of the unexpected (DQ) in turn becoming value-preferences (SQ) when that unexpected had some "good" results. You seem so very intent on demanding a external agent that orchestrates and designs, one that has created your particular existence with some grandiose cosmic purpose and significance. What you fail to see is that in doing so, you are eliminating the freedom in the MOQ that Pirsig's brilliance has extended away from "man" and down beneath the subatomic levels. You remove "freedom" to give yourself "purpose". An awful trade-off, and one that is not the MOQ. 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/
