Hi Roger, Jonathan, Andrea:
Rog, thanks for the clarification of your position. Correct me if I'm
wrong, but you make a distinction between an evolutionary direction in
individual species and evolution overall, there being no particular
direction in species, but overall a direction towards greater complexity,
versatility, awareness, and consciousness, implying purpose towards
a goal. I don't think Jonathan or Andrea will agree with this position
since they apparently object to the idea that evolution has any direction
or purpose whatsoever. Again I stand to be corrected.
Now instead of getting into a donnybrook about what the majority of
biologists consider to be the facts of evolution vs. their critics, I would
appreciate each of you gentlemen addressing head on Pirsig's
contention that Quality is a natural *moral force* like the other forces
identified by science (electromagnetism, gravity, strong and weak
nuclear). Here are some quotes from Lila that clearly indicate Pirsig's
belief in Dynamic and static Quality as natural forces (caps added to
highlight the question posed to each of you):
Dynamic Quality is the pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality, THE
SOURCE OF ALL THINGS, completely simple and always new. It was
the MORAL FORCE that had motivated the brujo in Zuni. It contains no
pattern of fixed rewards and punishments. Its only perceived good is
freedom and its only perceived evil is static quality itself--any pattern of
one-sided fixed values that tries to contain and kill the ongoing FREE
FORCE OF LIFE. (Chap 9)
Biological evolution can be seen as a process by which weak
DYNAMIC FORCES at a subatomic level discover stratagems for
overcoming huge STATIC INORGANIC FORCES at a superatomic
level. (Chap. 11)
Biological and social and intellectual patterns are not the possession
of substance. The laws that create and destroy these patterns are not
the laws of electrons and protons and other elementary particles. The
forces that create and destroy these patterns are FORCES OF VALUE.
(Chap. 12)
The force of evolutionary creation isn't contained by substance.
Substance is just one kind of static pattern left behind by the CREATIVE
FORCE. (Chap. 17)
But restrictions that stop the degenerates also stop the CREATIVE
DYNAMIC FORCES OF EVOLUTION. (Chap 17)
While Pirsig doesn't come right out and say that Quality forces are
comparable to other physical forces, I think the implication that they are
*natural* (built into the fabric of the universe) is clear. And while the
majority scientific opinion is that the forces of chance along with the
urge to survive account for evolution, Pirsig says no, it�s Dynamic
Quality doing the work.
My point would be that if you don't agree with Pirsig's explanation of
evolution, you cannot agree with his Metaphysics since it is built on his
idea of moral forces creating reality, including beetles, horseshoe
crabs and finally, thank God, us. (-:
But as Roger has taught me to say and correctly so, *I could be wrong.*
I look forward to your replies.
Platt
P.S. to Roger: Isn�t the survival urge an *interior* phenomena like
consciousness, suggesting both have been around since the
beginning?
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
