Hi John, On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 11:05 AM, John Carl <[email protected]> wrote: > My one clarification is in seeing intellect as the "code of art" for the 4th > level, rather than the whole level. That is, philosophies, systems of > thought and ideas about reality are all the patterns of which the 4th level > is comprised, and intellect is the artform which mediates and creates these > patterns.
This "code of art" business is frequently misunderstood. Pirsig described a "code of art" as Dynamic morality and a dynamic-static code--as a code that is not even a code. It is the unpatterned behavior of one who simply follows dynamic quality rather than static patterns. People frequently suggest "the code of art" as a level or an emerging level. Since the levels are collections of static patterns of value of a given type, it makes no sense to think of the "code of art" as a level, an emerging level, or a subset of a level as you seem to be suggesting above since the "code of art" suggests unpatterned responses to dynamic quality rather than static patterns of value. On the other hand, for patterns to evolve they have to orginate as unpatterned responses to dynamic quality which later become habits or patterned behaviors. So all the levels are "codes of art" in some sense as they all are established as patterns of responses to dynamic quality but are no longer themselves dynamic. Establishing new and better patterns of any of the four types can be thought of as following the "code of art." But either way you want to think of it, the "code of art" is equated with Dynamic morality and is about dynamic-static tension in general rather than a new or existing specific type of static pattern of value. See the following quotes from Lila: "What is today conventionally called "morality" covers only one of these sets of moral codes, the social-biological code. In a subject-object metaphysics this single social-biological code is considered to be a minor, "subjective," physically non-existent part of the universe. But in the Metaphysics of Quality all these sets of morals, plus another Dynamic morality are not only real, they are the whole thing." "First, there were moral codes that established the supremacy of biological life over inanimate nature. Second, there were moral codes that established the supremacy of the social order over biological life-conventional morals-proscriptions against drugs, murder, adultery, theft and the like. Third, there were moral codes that established the supremacy of the intellectual order over the social order-democracy, trial by jury, freedom of speech, freedom of the press. Finally there's a fourth Dynamic morality which isn't a code. He supposed you could call it a "code of Art" or something like that, but art is usually thought of as a such a frill that that title undercuts its importance. The morality of the brujo in Zuñi-that was Dynamic morality." Note how Pirsig equates the "code of art" with Dynamic morality rather than with a type of static pattern. Best, Steve 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/
