[djh] You are talking about betterness and perfection as if they are defined static quality things.
[Arlo] No, I am talking about the movement towards betterness, the evolutionary 'force'. [djh] This is true if you are interested in the quality of static patterns but this is not what it means to truly perfect something. [Arlo] As one moves towards 'betterness' or 'perfection', the DQ/SQ interplay Point B is better than Point A. How would you suggest 'perfecting' something without this happening? [djh] Here you seem to assume that Quality, intellectual or otherwise, can only come about as a result of comparison and evaluation between static quality things. [Arlo] Well, creation builds off existing patterns, the impetus to create, the pre-intellectual source of the creation, is Dynamic Quality, but the forms that emerge in its wake are made possible by the existing static patterns. It would not have been possible, for example, for a caveman to write ZMM. Phaedrus' insights, inspired by Dynamic Quality, built upon the existing strata of patterns of his experience. [djh] But I can think of a time when that isn't necessarily the case - Imagine the first thought ever. How did that come about if it is a result of an intellectual comparison between oppositional patterns? [Arlo] I imagine the first "thought" would be comparable to the first 'inorganic pattern', or the first 'biological pattern'. The human body did not spring into existence from the inorganic milieu. The first "thought" compared to, say, the thoughts you have today would be like comparing the first prokaryotes to the modern human physiology. At that level, though, the comparison of betterness was between 'to be' and 'not to be', so there was contrasted betterness, even if it wasn't intra-level. [djh] The goal of Zen is enlightenment which is brought about through the mastery and perfection of the static patterns but those patterns or the new patterns created are not the goal - the elimination of them is. [Arlo] If you're not a better person at Point B than Point A, if the "enlightenment" does not- in some way- create 'betterness', then I'd say its not enlightenment at all. Its simply "going to sleep". [djh] I see that you're focused on the quality of the static patterns which are created. [Arlo] No, I'm focused on the process by which static patterns are created, the evolutionary 'force'. [djh] But my point is a motorcycle mechanic isn't going to be a very good mechanic if he is continually judging the quality of these patterns and not trying to work through mastering them. This mastery is not achieved by simply focusing on the quality of this or that static pattern but through the perfection and thus killing of them. [Arlo] You're only seeing half the landscape, David. Simply 'killing patterns' does not make him a better mechanic, any more than being 'stuck' fixating on static patterns. It is through the breaking of stuckness and the creation of better patterns that he becomes a better mechanic at Point B than he was at Point A. [djh] Right, but a *Zen monk* who re-enters the world with 'something better'? When does that ever happen? [Arlo] Are you saying that Zen monks are not better, in any way, after they 'reject' patterns than before? There is nothing gained, nothing created, nothing made better, nothing improved, by this act? They gain no vision, no insights, no wisdom, no better understanding than they had before? [djh] I mean, just look at a Zen temple. They're mostly mastering the same patterns they did back in the 13th Century. [Arlo] But the monks are no 'better' than they were before they were monks? 'Betterness' does not just have mean 'physical objects', but this sort of stagnation you describe, where their insights, wisdom, vision, thoughts, understandings, are not made any 'better', in any way, by the experience... well, its unimpressive. [djh] Yes Lila simply created contrary, low quality patterns to the things which had transpired that she didn't like - aka her Child dying. However these patterns were still 'new', but just not that good because she hadn't worked through the problem. I'm happy to discuss this further if you like... [Arlo] I'd say 'different', but not 'new'. I'll get a new thread going about this later. [djh] I agree with the gist of what you say above but I'd like to dwell on this sentence.. "..[There are some folks] in this forum not simply walking around saying 'reject' but who are using the insights gained during that time of rejection to actively create something better. " Clearly your focus here is on creation of static patterns. But I don't think you can only create anything of value if you are just focused on the creation of static quality. I mean creation can come about not just as a result of a rejection and subsequent creation of static patterns, but as you've also pointed out - as a result of the killing of present static patterns by mastering them. [Arlo] Well, again, I have no doubt that meditation and ritual can free the mind to Dynamic Quality. But my point was that, sure, go do this. Go kill your patterns, go sit, do a tea ceremony, dance by the fire, whatever 'ritual' it is that frees your mind, but if you're not interested in using whatever insights this experience brings you to create something better, then why come here? You aren't 'killing patterns' by contributing to a philosophy forum. It serves no purpose to say "I am logging onto the MD list so I can kill my intellectual patterns". Go. Be free of patterns. No one is stopping you. The moon is full. Go dance. Kill your patterns, and if that's all you want to do, then run with the wind. But its idiotic to join a philosophy discussion group, which is about creating better intellectual patterns, and then do nothing but condemn that activity. Our lives are not entirely 'here', we all go off and 'flow', free our minds, maybe some do yoga, maybe some meditate, or smoke pe yote, or jog, or ride motorcycles, or fix them, or whatever... But, if you want to 'kill intellectual patterns', and that's all you want to do, why leave that meditation and join a philosophy forum? Unless you think you're a savior of souls, here to save the immoral intellectual infidels from their staticness. [djh] It is good to be interested in the static quality which is created, but alternatively it is good to value the DQ which creates that static quality. Both are important. [Arlo] Sure, which is why when I am NOT here, I am often seeking to clear my mind. But I do that, and then come here to see how that experience can contribute to creating/improving better intellectual patterns surrounding Pirsig's ideas. I may not succeed, but 'killing patterns' is not what this forum is for, its for 'building'. 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
