Hi Horse, You got that right. Applies to all worthwhile endeavors That's what I'm looking for -- the common thread. Thanks.
Regards, Platt. On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Horse <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Platt > > Something that popped into my head as I was reading your post was the old > saying about "99% Perspiration, 1% Inspiration" with respect to both Art and > Science.Not sure if the percentages are correct but this seems to sum up the > intellect-DQ relationship. > > Cheers > > Horse > > > On 30/06/2010 21:12, [email protected] wrote: > >> Hi Horse, >> >> Great post! Thanks. It's going to take me awhile to think about what >> you've >> written. But, to my mind this is the direction we should go if we ever >> want to >> add anything significant to the understanding and value of the MOQ, not >> that it >> doesn't have great value already. The last few lines of Pirsig's SODV >> paper >> have always intrigued me. >> >> "They were at the cutting edge of knowledge plunging into the unknown >> trying to >> bring something out of that unknown into a static form that would be of >> value >> to everyone. As Bohr might have loved to observe, science and art are just >> two >> different complementary ways of looking at the same thing. In the largest >> sense >> it is really unnecessary to create a meeting of the arts and sciences >> because >> in actual practice, at the most immediate level they have never really >> been >> separated. They have always been different aspects of the same human >> purpose." >> >> It's this joining of art and science under the code of Quality that I find >> a >> logical extension of the MOQ whereby different branches of knowledge now >> pursuing different goals with different methods unite in common "human >> purpose." >> >> That's my challenge, anyway, and why your post was of great value to me. >> >> Regards, >> Platt >> >> >> >> On 30 Jun 2010 at 14:51, Horse wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hi Platt >>> >>> Apologies for not continuing our previous conversation in a similar vein >>> - I got waylaid by music! >>> >>> Hmmm, tricky one this. >>> >>> The codes that Pirsig talks about illustrate the way a higher static >>> level dominates the static level below - organic dominates inorganic, >>> social dominates organic, intellect dominates social. He then talks of a >>> 'dynamic morality' and says that it isn't really a code, not exactly >>> anyway, more like a 'code of art'. >>> In the context it appears, this 'code of art' describes a relationship >>> between DQ ('dynamic morality') and intellect. It's not really a code >>> because it involves an undefinable element (DQ) and a definable element, >>> intellect. If it was a code, in the sense of the previous codes he >>> refers to, then it would mean that DQ is defined, which it can't be >>> according to the MoQ. Instead of a code maybe we should call it the >>> 'intellect-DQ relationship' or something similar. The way in which Art >>> and Intellect interact. The artistic (dynamic) element dominates >>> intellect but is dependent upon it, just as intellect dominates social >>> but is dependent upon it, social dominates organic but is dependent etc. >>> in the evolutionary structure of the MoQ's hierarchy. >>> What I think this means is that although intellect is subordinate to >>> art, art is not possible without intellect - in the same way that the >>> social level is subordinate to intellect but intellect would not be >>> possible without the social level. Given that art is unique to humans >>> (I'm not aware of art existing elsewhere i.e. in other animals), then >>> the 'intellect-DQ relationship' is also unique to humans. So when we >>> create music or a painting or a novel (or whatever) then we imply that, >>> as art, it has a unique relationship to human intellect. Intellect is >>> necessary but not dominant. The act of creating is dynamic but the >>> result is static may be another way of putting it. Maybe! >>> >>> Re: your question "... the MoQ, like art, isn't static, or shouldn't be >>> anyway." you would have to consider whether there is an element of art >>> in the MoQ (creation) and what relationship does that have to the >>> intellectual pattern that is the MoQ. If you're saying that the MoQ is >>> art then, by implication, it can't be defined and as such is not a >>> metaphysics. I think the best way I can think of at the moment to answer >>> this is to say that the relationship of DQ to the MoQ is covered by the >>> 'intellect-DQ relationship'. In this way Quality (DQ/SQ) gives a defined >>> element (SQ - MoQ) and an undefined element (DQ) as the relationship. >>> Pirsig created the MoQ (artistic) and the result is a static pattern. >>> >>> I'm not sure if this is the best answer or the one you want to hear but >>> anyway, that's my initial take on it. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> >>> Horse >>> >>> >>> >>> On 28/06/2010 20:20, Platt Holden wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Horse<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hi Platt >>>>> >>>>> Where did Pirsig say this? I believe he talked about a code of art and >>>>> this >>>>> was in the context of relating Intellect to DQ. If there is a level of >>>>> art >>>>> then it becomes static quality - something that art is not - or >>>>> shouldn't be >>>>> anyway! >>>>> >>>>> Cheers >>>>> >>>>> Horse >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Hi Horse, >>>> >>>> Chapter 13 of Lila. The context is the supremacy of higher moral codes >>>> of >>>> lower with the top being Dynamic morality which might be called a code >>>> of >>>> art From Pirsig's comments about the MOQ being open to improvements >>>> (philosophy vs. philosophology) I presume the MOQ, like art, isn't >>>> static, >>>> or shouldn't be anyway. What do you think? >>>> >>>> >>> >> 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 >> >> >> > > -- > > "Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production > deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid." > — Frank Zappa > > 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 > 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
