Hi Andre, Nice job digging up those quotes and tying them together.
Best, Steve On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:14 AM, Andre Broersen <[email protected]> wrote: > From Lila's Child: > > Hugo: "In my view, "free will" is a term that can only be used of > self-conscious (self reflective) creatures. "Will" is a term we may use of > any organism- of any autonomous entity- describing the goal involved in > autonomy. And "free will" is the ability to change that goal; the ability of > the autonomous entity to chose between more than one predetermined (as for > that entity) goal" (p 216) > > Pirsig's response:"Traditionally, this is the meaning of free will. But the > MOQ can argue that free will exists at all levels with increasing freedom to > make choices as one ascends the levels. At the lowest inorganic level, the > freedom is so small that it can be said that nature follows laws but the > quantum theory shows that within the laws the freedom is still there..." > (Annotn 75) > > Andre: > The same can be said of the freedom existing at the organic level(Law of the > Jungle) the social level (the Law) and the intellectual level ( '...nearly > complete choice, e.g. what I believe to be true) and to complete freedom at > the Dynamic 'Code of Art' level. (Anthony's PhD, p 137) > > It seems to me that Pirsig has 're-contextualized' the expression of freedom > or the will to be free in terms of preference and probability. In this way > one can argue that "The MOQ puts an end to this ancient freewill vs. > determinism controversy by showing that both preference and probability are > subsets of value..."(ibid) > > On p222 of Lila's Child, Bodvar asks: "If the world is composed of values, > then who is doing the valuing? > > Let me re-phrase this and place it in this debate: to what extent is _our_ > behavior free/determined? Do we have '_individual_' freedom?(this is Ham's > catch cry) or as Steve (to Arlo) would put it:"... but I wonder if you'd > agree with me that in your second way of understanding free will as a useful > or not useful concept, it no longer makes much sense to wonder if _we_ > _have_ it.". > > Pirsig's response to Bodvar: "This is a subtle slip back into subject-object > thinking. Values have bee converted to a kind of object in this sentence, > and then the question is asked, "If values are an object,then where is the > subject?" The answer is found in the MOQ sentence,"It is not Lila who has > values, it is values that have Lila."Both the subject and the object are > patterns of value."( Annotn 76). > > To further clarify: > "It's important to remember that both science and Eastern religions regard > "the individual" as an empty concept. It is literally a figure of speech. If > you start assigning concrete reality to it, you will find yourself in a > philosophic quandary".( Annotn 77) > > "There isn't any 'man' independent of the patterns. Man is the patterns. > This fictitious 'man' has many synonyms; 'mankind', 'people', 'the public' > and even such pronouns as 'I', 'he', and 'they'. Our language is so > organized around them and they are so convenient to use it is impossible to > get rid of them. There is really no need to. Like 'substance' they can be > used as long as it is remembered that they are terms for collections of > patterns and not some independent primary reality of their own". (LILA, > p158) (Sorry Ham) > > The freewill vs determinism debate can better be restated in terms of > preference and probability (which, as Pirsig says, are subsets of value). > This makes much more sense, also from an evolutionary perspective where > "...Pirsig's particular perception of the universe's evolution [is seen] as > being primarily an evolution of values...". ( Anthony's PhD p 87) > > This process is the interplay/struggle of preferences and probabilities as > laid out in the MOQ. In other words: DQ/sq. It is the dance of 'Lila'. > > Imho. 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
