3.Dynamic Quality is best understood as "betterness" to which Andre responded: I really think a Zen Buddhist will laugh at this...and perhaps Pirsig as well.
Ron in response: Perhaps Andre perhaps, But I believe the master as well as Bob would agree. For arguements sake, lets see what the consequences are to take Quality as each were to be true. Andre now: Hi Ron and apologies for the late reply. Since Dan (by quoting Pirsig) has already commented on 1 and 2 (needless to say I agree with Dan) I'll respond to 3. I am reluctant to 'understand' DQ as 'betterness'. For me, DQ simply is. Contextualised however within the framework of the MOQ we can see that Pirsig develops the notion of DQ as (unconceptualised) freedom and sq as (conceptualised) order. Cosmological evolution appears to be the result of DQ to move away from, to escape 'the bondage of matter and gain freedom in an increasingly coherent cosmos'. This leads Anthony to observe that DQ 'can be perceived as continually attracting the static patterns... 'towards a further and greater ordered coherence...though this is not pre-ordained and this freedom remains undefined'. (from Anthony's PhD, p 75). If DQ 'furthers' static notions of freedom, coherence, harmony then indeed, from a static point of view it can be regarded as 'betterness'. But I remain reluctant to then 'understand DQ AS betterness. I mean, some evolutionary processes are better than others... .(Pirsig, AHP tapes) Am I making sense Ron or am I making it unnecessarily difficult for you (and myself)? Ron: First, if we are pragmatists, then indeed all experience rests on a static point of view and that leads the conversation to "meaning". I argue that DQ must have meaning to be useful. Second, that is exactly what I'm saying "some things are better than others" and not I'm not sure how this is a support to that statement that DQ is unconceptualized and must remain unconceptualized within the framework of the MoQ. "So what Phaedrus was saying was that not just life, but everything, is an ethical activity. It is nothing else. When inorganic patterns of reality create life the Metaphysics of Quality postulates that they've done so because it's 'better' and that this definition of 'betterness' - this beginning response to Dynamic Quality - is an elementary unit of ethics upon which all right and wrong can be based. In general, given a choice of two courses to follow and all other things being equal, that choice which is more Dynamic, that is, at a higher level of evolution, is more moral." -Lila Pragmatically Andre, DQ being understood as undefined betterness is more useful than insisting that it remain unconceptualized. It has meaning, and that meaning is linked to the concept of moral order. that is why it is important to develop our reasons for our values it is better to do so the unconceptualized is then using a term to convey nothing, and that is an abstraction, but experience, is constant taste. It is emersed in the now. how does the unconceptualized square with experience? I am composed of layers of value systems, feelings, temperature, hunger, sleepy, ect. RMP: "The purpose of mystic meditation is not to remove oneself from experience but to bring one's self closer to it by eliminating stale, confusing, static, intellectual attachments of the past." -Lila Clinging to certain notions of betterness. Like some of us who cling to the idea that it is better to interpret DQ as having no meaning. 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
