Hello everyone On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Carrie Cisneros <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Dan, > >>> Dan, how is biological patterns different than plain old nature, and are >> we >>> so sure that there is no intellect or art in nature, and social >>> patterning >>> for goshsakes, so that it can be called just biological? >> >> Hi Carrie >> >> I am not exactly sure what you're asking here. The point I was attempting >> to make is that in the MOQ, experience comes first. In scientific realism, >> matter comes first. When someone says something like this: > > [carrie] > Thanks for responding Dan. I see what you mean about realism, and I > wholeheartedly agree with the MoQ view that experience precedes matter > or mind. But I was asking about the MoQ level, as Pirsig describes in > Lila, where the 2nd level is biological. Does being of the 2nd level, > preclude other patterns?
Hi Carrie You're welcome. Thank you for your reply. I don't believe second level patterns are precluded from other patterns. Here is a quote to consider: "In this plain of understanding static patterns of value are divided into four systems: inorganic patterns, biological patterns, social patterns and intellectual patterns. They are exhaustive. That's all there are. If you construct an encyclopedia of four topics-Inorganic, Biological, Social and Intellectual-nothing is left out. No "thing," that is. Only Dynamic Quality, which cannot be described in any encyclopedia, is absent. "But although the four systems are exhaustive they are not exclusive. They all operate at the same time and in ways that are almost independent of each other. "This classification of patterns is not very original, but the Metaphysics of Quality allows an assertion about them that is unusual. It says they are not continuous. They are discrete. They have very little to do with one another. Although each higher level is built on a lower one it is not an extension of that lower level. Quite the contrary. The higher level can often be seen to be in opposition to the lower level, dominating it, controlling it where possible for its own purposes." [Robert Pirsig, Lila] Dan comments: Note that he says they operate all at the same time; they are not exclusive, yet they are not continuous. Each level arises from the other and yet they are not an extension of that level. Rather, they are often in opposition to the lower level. I go on to talk about this a bit more later... [carrie] > For instance, pretty much all life that I > can think of, lives according to some sort of social arrangement, and > there are pantheistic ideas, that nature is imbued with a very special > kind of mind, is that impossible in the MoQ? Dan: If I understand pantheism, it purports that All-is-God. Is that the mind of which you speak? If so, I would venture to say the MOQ views God as a social pattern designed to enslave the naive. Or perhaps I am being too harsh. I don't know. >Carrie: > I was just curious about that, is all. Dan: I am delighted you asked. Thank you! > >> >> [Krimel] >> Biological patterns are experienced irrationally. They are unnamed. >> >> Dan comments: >> >> They are basically saying biological patterns come first, that they are >> 'out there' waiting for us to experience them. Do you see my point? >> >> Now, I don't think biological patterns are different than plain old nature. >> In the MOQ inorganic and biological patterns correspond to physical >> patterns. We can see them. We can pick them up and examine them under >> microscopes. >> >> Social and intellectual patterns correspond to non-physical patterns. We >> cannot see them. Robert Pirsig uses the example of the President of the >> United States. There is no way to physically determine that the President >> is the President. It is a social pattern of value. Think of the Prince and >> the Pauper, if you will. >> > > [carrie] > Oh yeah. I remember that part. I thought to myself, "well maybe I > couldn't, but I bet Sherlock Holmes could," Because real social > patterns usually have very physical effects upon people. Even under > their skin. Dan: That could well be. I suspect it is more of a cultural judgement than purely physical signs, however. Sherlock could pick up on those, sure. But his deductions are intellectual in nature, right? I mean, often times, Watson would see the same things Holmes did and yet deduce something totally different, and usually of lower quality. So it would seem Holmes is more adept at manipulating the symbols that represent reality. >carrie: > But mainly, yes, I get your point and have no disagreement. I just > guess I still have questions about "plain old nature" being only the > second level,and nothing more. In many ways, I think of nature as a > source of human values. Didn't the old Taoists say the same? Dan: I think all four levels inform us and make us who we are. Obviously, without the inorganic molecules of our bodies holding 'us' together we wouldn't exist. Without the biological life force that imbibes those molecules we could not respond to Dynamic Quality. So yes, in a very real way the biological level is the source of human values. But in the MOQ, there are different sets of values, or moral codes. And those codes compete with each other. The biological level is ruled by the law of the jungle: eat or be eaten, the survival of the fittest. The social level is ruled by conformance: civilization would never flourish without most people conforming to laws and regulations. It fights the biological urges like sex and debauchery and seeks to make everyone a productive member of society. The intellectual level seeks to free members of society from the restraints of the laws and regulations that dominate their lives. > > >> Social and intellectual patterns are human perceptions. It may well be that >> wolves have a type of social pack mentality but they filter their world >> through wolf senses while we filter ours through human senses. >> >> Does that help at all? If not, feel free to say so. >> >> Thank you, >> >> Dan > > It helped a great deal, Dan. Thanks for the good discussion. Here's > hoping for more! Dan: Anytime! Thank you too, Dan http://www.danglover.com 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
