Hi Dan, >> Well I think it is all a matter of how far you draw the analogy. While, as >> I've said, freedom could result in chaos which is not DQ, that which we >> generally talk about when our eyes light up when we talk of freedom is >> Dynamic Quality. > > Dan: > Right. Chaos as disorder might be seen as the antithesis of intellect. > But that is not freedom in the Dynamic sense of of what is better. > Chaos isn't better, it is worse. Rather than moving toward Quality it > seems to be a falling away.
Well I'm not so sure it is right to say chaos is good or bad. When harmonious static quality changes to something better or worse, that change could be said to be 'chaotic', but it is merely the patterns changing and forming into a new, better or worse, thing.. To put this all into perspective though… When we talk of chaos being free or about how much 'freedom' something has, this is always on reflection. We can say, using the MOQ, that inorganic freedom for instance, is very low, and that intellectual freedom is high based on how much it variation there is.. This is the type of freedom more commonly found in the West where we are interested in how much freedom a certain social structure will bring us. However, as we both agree - when peoples eyes light up when they speak of freedom in the West, it is true that they are probably talking about Dynamic Quality and not of the different 'amounts' of freedom each level has. So how do we reconcile the two? This is my point... In the West we want to experience that 'Freedom' so we try and capture it within a social structure which allows for as much freedom as possible. While, what we like about freedom is the end result (DQ), we are still interested in looking at what particular static patterns can best bring about that freedom, and not at wholly rejecting those patterns to reveal Dynamic Quality in that way. How we go about achieving freedom is different than is typically found the East. We still are interested in creating the right particular patterns to achieve that freedom. >>> Dan: >>> Perhaps. But again, the danger is getting stuck on the social rituals. >>> It would appear this is more prevalent in the East than in the West, >>> wouldn't you agree? >> >> Yes I would agree. But this is my point. It's because they are not >> interested in particulars in the East that from the Western perspective of >> freedom - they get 'stuck' on particular patterns. But it is a matter of >> emphasis. Someone in the East will be more likely to be open to freeing >> themselves from those patterns by mastery, rather than doing something else >> and getting 'unstuck' from a pattern in that way. > > Dan: > What I mean to say is something like the caste system in India, China, > and Japan, etc., for example. How would one go about mastering those > patterns and getting unstuck? It is already a deep part of their culture. There isn't anything they consciously think about and have to abstract about and wonder about - how do I be free of these shitty caste patterns? Being from the East they will value mastery - they won't be thinking about "what can I do to be free of this situation" because that is an entirely different type of freedom. From their perspective of freedom - they know what they have to do. It's right in front of them. To take it to an absurd extreme… You could be shovelling coal into the gates of hell and yet find freedom from it by mastering the shovelling. If you master the shovelling to the point where there is no longer a distinction between you, the shovel or the gates of hell. Then point to the suffering… There is none! From a static quality perspective, we can say, 'wow that's *Really* low quality'. But from the "perspective" of the shoveler, where's the low quality? Indeed, where's the value judgement? If they have really become the shovelling then there wouldn't be any such value judgements… It's just a wondrous unfolding of doing.. Now as always, I want to be clear here and state that of course both types of freedom exist in both cultures - but it is a matter of emphasis... > Dan: > See above. It would appear the caste system came about as a form of > celebrity worship. The same thing happens here in the West when a > person becomes so famous no one will stand up to them and tell them > no. Elvis Presley, Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, the list goes on and > on. But in the East these patterns were and are even more insidious in > how they keep whole groups of people down without any hope of making a > better life for themselves. Yes. This is where I say that it is because of the historical emphasis on a different type of freedom than the one found in the West, the East has not focused on freedom from particular patterns such as the caste system. Both types of freedom have been traditionally opposed.. When you attend a Zen retreat for instance, you can imagine the type of response you would get if you just did 'whatever you liked'. As discussed in Lila, you do not ultimately free yourself from patterns by constantly doing other patterns. So from the perspective of the East, if you are constantly trying something else, then this isn't necessarily considered a good thing on the path to spiritual enlightenment and mastery… But of course, there has been and is value in being free from some such a static quality and doing some other patterns.. >> Yes. I don't disagree with any of this. But I still maintain that there is >> value in Pirsig's words from Lila where he points to this difference in the >> way each culture reflects Dynamic Quality. To me there just appears to be >> an inherent part of the culture of the East which means they are predisposed >> to hard work. And I think that inherent part is the way each culture views >> freedom.. >> >> If your culture is more interested in finding freedom through mastery rather >> than freedom through doing something else then your culture is going to be >> perceived as harder working no? > > Dan: > Of course there is value in the quote from Lila but I think it needs > to be viewed in the proper context. I cannot see a peasant going to > work at Fox Conn with the ideal of mastering the buffing out of face > plates for the new iPhones. They go to work there with the ideal of > making enough money to perhaps better their life and maybe send money > home for the betterment of their family. They do not work long hard > hours hoping to achieve freedom. That is probably the last thing on > their mind. I disagree. Finding freedom through mastery is a deep part of their culture and how they have been raised. In other words it is what they value. To give but one example… As you might know Confucius is well known by most people in China. His sayings are often quoted by young and old alike as truisms… Here's a couple of his quotes on the idea of personal mastery: "The will to win, the desire to succeed, the urge to reach your full potential... these are the keys that will unlock the door to personal excellence." "It does not matter how slowly you go as long as you do not stop." The same is said for this Ming Dynasty quote... "Happiness from happiness is not true happiness. Only happiness from suffering is true." There is no room there in this Ming Dynasty quote to say, it's okay, if you are suffering or if things get too tough, you should be free to go do something else… It's a matter of values and emphasis and the East, generally speaking, emphasises the DQ which can be found through mastery while the West emphasises the freedom(DQ) which can be found through a particular sq structure that allows one to be able to do something else if you are suffering... > Dan: > I would say human rights are so basic they go beyond being cultural > and can be seen as universal. But yes, all one need to is look at the > startling number of creationists in the US to see how a major religion > influences what a culture values. In the same way, religion in the > East can have a detrimental affect on culture. I'd agree with that, however just to be clear, religion can have a positive affect on culture as well… Zen for instance, I'm sure you'd agree, has good views on mysticism for example.. >> Right. I've since improved my understanding and looked at a definition of >> the term analogy… >> >> "A comparison between one thing and another, typically for the purpose of >> explanation or clarification" >> >> I suppose freedom is the way western culture reflects Dynamic Quality so if >> we say an analogy is a similarity rather than a strongly direct relationship >> I have no troubles with that.. > > Dan: > That is what an analogy is so I have no problem either. :) Okay. >> This is tricky Dan because they do not know - so it is like a hypothesis >> contrary to fact. Furthermore I disagree with the prediction. I think >> there is value in being free from a particular pattern by being able to do >> something else. Not free of all patterns, but free of a pattern which is >> causing particular suffering. >> >> It is this particular type of freedom which is represented in movements such >> as the freedom of speech movement… If there was not such impetus to free >> ourselves from a particular negative static quality suffering then we would >> never see a need to free ourselves from tyranny. > > Dan: > So the quote from Lila is like (analogous to) a hypothesis contrary to > fact? Does that mean it is without value? And if you feel this is so, > why did you bring the quote into the discussion. Hopefully my earlier extended clarification has cleared up this confusion. If not, I'll answer this in the next post. > Anyway, I will assume for the moment that I understand the MOQ to some > degree. :-) > So when I talk about freedom of speech and freedom of religion > I am talking about freedom from social patterns of quality that seek > to muffle the intellect. And of course there is value there. But > Dynamic freedom is a movement away from all patterns. Yes I would say so. And that 'Dynamic' freedom is not to be found by changing sq or doing something else. It is found by 'waking up' as you say and mastering the static quality which is in front of you until the DQ which is there all along is revealed. >> I see. I suppose this is a good question to ask yourself.. Often times >> internal conflict like this can be healthy and produce a higher quality work. > > Dan: > Sure, there's that. On the other hand, when one gets hung up on the > 'can I do better in explaining' the work is never done. I get to the > point where I just know I have done all I can do. What is interesting > about the ebook revolution is an author can easily go in and change > the manuscript at a later point in time whereas a print book is much > more difficult to update and change. That is interesting, I guess with ebooks it will become more about how static an author sees his work and less about the physical limitations of change. And it's good that you (eventually) find that end point too… Thanks again Dan, I'm interested in your thoughts on freedom here as, at some point - possibly soon(or not), we should be able to go back to our original discussion with a greater understanding.. -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
