[Jan Anders] Football, shared attention and sex are only examples of patterns at the levels, we should hold on to RMP’s definition to be able to extract the more details better.
"Celebrity is to social patterns as sex is to biological patterns. Now he was getting it. This celebrity is Dynamic Quality within a static social level of evolution. It looks and feels like pure Dynamic Quality for a while, but it isn't. Sexual desire is the Dynamic Quality that primitive biological patterns once used to organize themselves. Celebrity is the Dynamic Quality that primitive social patterns once used to organize themselves. That gives celebrity a new importance.” Lila [Arlo] I don't have any qualms with Pirsig's description of celebrity as the social equivalent to biological sex. But here, too, I'd caution that to reduce all social patterns to "celebrity" would be like reducing all biological patterns to "sex". I think all of these: shared attention, celebrity and (I'd strongly argue) "activity" (*in the previously mentioned Russian/Scandinavian sense), are all necessary and important aspects to talking about social patterns and the social level (in the same way that carbon atoms, sex and neural masses are all important ways to consider and understand the biological level). Now I'm bumping up against my daily quota (for the first time in a long while), so I'll catch up on any further remarks tomorrow. 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
