dmb said:
.., there is no such thing as changelessness. Static patterns are relatively 
stable, but even stars are born and die and the big bang was a very big change. 
These are the inorganic level of patterns, the most stable of all, and still 
the whole story is a drama of unfolding and collapse.

Krimel replied:
So Static Quality is undefinable as well?


dmb says
No, I'm just saying static quality is not eternal or changeless. Truth, for 
example, is provisional. That doesn't mean it's so slippery that we can't make 
a point or assert the "facts" as they presently exist but in terms of 
historical time we fully expect tomorrow's static intellectual patterns to be 
different from today's. The idea that societies and organisms evolve is just 
par for the course, of course, and like I said, the inorganic patterns are far 
from changeless. Stars and rocks and the ground under foot used to be the 
images of eternity but now the scientific imagination can employ a sort of 
time-laspe photography. And we can literally see the birth and death of stars. 
We know that mountain ranges are born of shifting continents and that in time 
they melt away. If anything in this universe is eternal, it's change. Static 
means stable, not forever frozen.


dmb said:
DQ can't be rightly thought of as "patterns that do change" because DQ is not 
patterned at all. It's likened to a stream, a flux, to the cutting edge of an 
ongoing event, etc..


Krimel replied:

So DQ is "...likened to a stream, a flux, to the cutting edge of an ongoing 
event, etc.."; but it is not like change?


dmb says:
It's not patterned. The analogies certainly portray DQ as constantly in flux 
and in motion, but they are just analogies. I mean, velocity and motion are 
physical properties that can be calculated and predicted and all that. DQ is 
LIKE that, by analogy, but remember we are talking about experience, not a 
thing. Even when we're talking physics, which involves static patterns both 
inorganic and intellectual, there is lots and lots of change. And so it doesn't 
help much to distinguish static from dynamic in terms of change and 
changelessness, because both sides change and neither side is changeless. 



Krimel said:
Pirsig does more or less create the problem in Lila by failing to distinguish 
between Quality and Dynamic Quality. He uses them interchangeably and as a 
result often incorrectly. I don't think it is hard to read past these errors 
and to forgive him for his enthusiastic applications of the ideas represented 
but a literal reading without this filter produces weird effects. 


dmb says:

I just don't believe that and I'll bet all my cattle that you can't come up 
with a single example. Show me one passage where the meaning of the terms in 
question is unclear or ambiguous. What the heck, I'll bet my horses too. 



Krimel axed:

What is the point of the modifier in Lila?


dmb says:

The modifiers are a result of the first cut. His analytic knife produced 
"static" and "dynamic", replacing the classic-romantic split. The replacement 
became necessary because he realized that romantic quality and dynamic quality 
aren't the same. 


dmb said:

What Pirsig and James are saying is that we have ignored one of these elements 
and that this ignorance causes personal, cultural and philosophical problems.



Krimel replied:
Which is why in ZMM the split is characterized as romantic - classic. The 
romantic style prefers to be guided by the passions. The classic style prefers 
to be guided by reason. Jung called these two styles intuitive and intellectual.



dmb says:
  
That's about right but it's also true that the romantic style is a style of 
thought. He characterizes Plato and Aristotle as romantic and classic, for 
example. The romantic style in not any less intellectual and so we're talking 
about static patterns either way. That's why DQ and romantic quality are not 
the same. 


Thanks. This conversation seems for real. I sincerely appreciate that.


                                          
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4
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/md/archives.html

Reply via email to