Hi David
I don't often send through 'me too' posts but I thought I should do so
on this one.
You get to the core of the MoQ in a simple and easy to understand way.
(Static) Patterns (of value) are the means by which we make sense of
(order) our experience and, consequently, how we reason.
Only DQ is left out!
Thank you
Horse
On 10/03/2012 00:58, David Harding wrote:
Hi Mark,
That's the core of our disagreement. The fact that you do not see the beauty in Pirsig's
choice of the word 'patterns' and think that his selection of the word is rather
arbitrary and that "he could have used other terms".
From the perspective of the MOQ the correct answer is the best one. Wouldn't
you agree? I think so... So I think an explanation of the MOQ which has beauty
in Pirsig's use of the word 'patterns' is better than one in which his
selection of this word is arbitrary. A beautiful idea has harmony with our
experience and the MOQ is the most harmonious explanation of our general
experience ever created. It's for this reason that I don't think that the
choice of the term 'patterns' is as arbitrary as you imply.
The reason there is beauty in the term 'patterns' is because that is how our
intellect works. It inductively recognises patterns and designates these
patterns names. Pirsig has said as much in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle
Maintenance:
"This morning I talked about hierarchies of thought...the system. Now I want to
talk about methods of finding one's way through these hierarchies...logic.
Two kinds of logic are used, inductive and deductive. Inductive inferences start
with observations of the machine and arrive at general conclusions. For example, if
the cycle goes over a bump and the engine misfires, and then goes over another bump
and the engine misfires, and then goes over another bump and the engine misfires,
and then goes over a long smooth stretch of road and there is no misfiring, and then
goes over a fourth bump and the engine misfires again, one can logically conclude
that the misfiring is caused by the bumps. That is induction: reasoning from
particular experiences to general truths."
Our minds inductively create hierarchies of thought through this logical
detection of patterns. That's it. That's all there is to it.
If, on the other hand, we use these patterns we have created to deduce
something not directly experienced, then that is a deductive inference...
"Deductive inferences do the reverse. They start with general knowledge and predict
a specific observation. For example, if, from reading the hierarchy of facts about the
machine, the mechanic knows the horn of the cycle is powered exclusively by electricity
from the battery, then he can logically infer that if the battery is dead the horn will
not work. That is deduction."
You might now be saying.. "but then if Pirsig's choice of the term 'patterns' has
been selected because of its intellectual component, why do we call them inorganic,
biological and social 'patterns'? "
The reason we call them this is because they are only ever recognised as
patterns *because* of our intellect. They only exist *because* of our
intellect. The recognition of this fact is built in right there in their name.
-David.
On Saturday, 10 March 2012 at 1:43 AM, 118 wrote:
Hi David,
My guess is that it fit within the rhetoric of the chapter. I am sure he could have used
other terms. The point is that it is just a word. "Things" do not really exist
as patterns, that is a word he chose at the time. If one wants to say that patterns is
the most enlightening term to use for presentation it should be explained. To me it
sounds like mathematical formula. As such it leaves a lot out.
Encapsulation of the understanding of a book to a single word seems (to me) to
dismiss the message.
Cheers, and thanks for the question.
Sent laboriously from an iPhone,
Mark
On Mar 9, 2012, at 6:04 AM, David Harding<[email protected]
(mailto:[email protected])> wrote:
Hi Mark,
As an aside to our ongoing conversation. I'd like to have another..
Why do you think things are called 'patterns' in the MOQ?
The values part is pretty self explanatory.
But why did Pirsig use the term patterns?
-David.
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
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
