ROG STILL SMELLS (a contradiction)
To Horse and Rich;
Rich and I questioned the inconsistency between Pirsig's free will and the
concept being isolated to living beings, and Horse answered:
Horse:
<<<<<<
But a city or a culture does not exist without the people that inhabit
them - in an anthropcentric sense. The social patterns of the city or
the culture exert an influence upon their members which in turn
affects the patterns. Similarly with thoughts, principles and theories.
They require a means by which to manifest themselves. The patterns
themselves are static but they change and evolve by interaction and
emergence. The means by which they interact and emerge is the
network of humans which they (partially) create and influence.
Cities and cultures may respond dynamically but do they _perceive_
Dynamic Quality? The patterns don't perceive - that's a property of
what they create.>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Roger Replies:
I am not buying it, Horse. Something is still amiss. Let me try to spell
out my concern.
1) The "extent to which one follows DQ" is Pirsig's definition of freedom.
2) Societies and Intellectual concepts are more dynamic and higher forms of
evolution than is any biological pattern.
3) Society and intellect "are not properties of man any more than cats are a
property of cat food" (p. 303)
4) Therefore I think according to the MOQ, the higher two levels are more
free than is a "living being".
Now I agree that this is not FREE WILL as commonly understood in SOM-land,
but cultures and stock markets and theories are more free per the MOQ than
are those of us that thought we controlled these higher patterns. Let me know
what I am missing. (Or is Pirsig missing something?)
Always looking for a new angle,
Rog
PS -- Welcome back Struan! As provacative as ever, I am glad to see!!!!!
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
