Hi Case I agree with everything you ay below until you get to teleology. I see no clearknockdown argument against some kind of weak version of teleology that says that in any situation there are a number of possible outcomes and any active system can make choices about which outcome it will act to bring about, and exactly where we draw a line about what sort of systems can do this is unclear, maybe atoms make choices when they capture electrons even.
Otherwise, great post. David M ----- Original Message ----- From: "Case" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 4:08 PM Subject: Re: [MD] Heads or tails? > [Kevin] > But you do recognize the reality of others (lower case o)? Which is to > say > you and me and others enjoy individual lives. From this perspective, what > is Quality (capital Q)? Is Quality (capital Q) the same as quality (lower > case q)? > > [Case] > My view of Quality is a bit different than some. I regard Quality as The > Way. It exists in the moment of sensation; when we instantly begin the > process of classifying sensation into perception. It is a "Blink" moment > when we apprehend something as good or bad. It can only be experienced. It > can not be defined because each experience is different. When you try to > define it you quickly degenerate into legalism. > > Jesus put it this way: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! > for > ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier > matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have > done, > and not to leave the other undone. Ye blind guides, which strain at a > gnat, > and swallow a camel." > > Lao Tsu said this: "Thus it was that when the Tao was lost, its attributes > appeared; when its attributes were lost, benevolence appeared; when > benevolence was lost, the proprieties appeared. > > I see this as a kind of Humian argument that trouble comes when we begin > to > rely so heavily on our classifications of past experience that we miss > what > is fresh in the present. When you define Quality you think you know it > when > you see it but you stop looking for what is new and unique in its present > manifestation. In other words we focus more on our perceptions and > memories > that on immediate sensation. We are too busy classifying each moment into > the categories we have already created to notice that the moment may be > showing us a whole new category. > > > [Kevin] > Right. Subjective imaginings or objective manifestations. By the way, > who are "they?" > > [Case] > There are phenomenologist and Buddhists and solipsists in our midst who > deny > the existence of external reality. > > [Kevin] > Right. And so our subjective imaginings and objective reality matter. > But more importantly, what or how do they matter? Is the measure of their > importance or worth or quality itself something subjective or objective? > Condemnation and judgement is the dark side of subject/object metaphysics, > imo. > > [Case] > This is just my personal take on it but for me perception and memory are > whole subjective matters. They are the product of my experience with > Other. > Other does not always conform to my expectations and this forces me to > revise my inner models a lot. Objectivity comes about when I communication > with others and we share our experiences. When we can agree upon the > commonality of our mutual experiences that is objectivity. Thus > objectivity > is inter-subjectivity. > > What the MoQ adds is that change (DQ) and stasis (SQ) are fundamental to > both the process of individual perception and to the formation of > inter-subjective agreement. Pirsig for example does not say that SOM is > not > there, only that it is not fundamental. Both are shaped by the > interactions > of DQ and SQ. > > [Kevin] > Speculative metaphysics? Is there any other kind? > > [Case] > I don't find Taoism to be speculative and to the extent that the MoQ is in > line with it I don't find it speculative either. That each individual is > alone in a world of their own sensation and perception seems to me to be a > matter of concrete fact. That the shadows on our customized cave walls > wiggle and hold still is not speculative in my cave. Even in the ideal > world > of mathematics, Greek geometry dealt exclusively with shape and form and > extension. These are static properties. Newton gave us laws of motion > which > help us define the dynamic properties or relationships changing over time. > More recent advances in math and science teach us that "laws" are > expressions of probability. Even deterministic, purely causal, laws can > produce unpredictable results. > > For a metaphysics to rise to the level of common understanding it can not > be > airy and refined. It needs to speak to the common experience of most > people. > I think most people intuitively know that the world abounds with > uncertainty. Our language is rich with metaphors describing this. Our > societies are constructed to maximize order and reduce the impact of > unpredictable change. The MoQ offers at least the vocabulary and > principles > to construct what Pirsig said would be "a metaphysics of randomness." > > It is disappointing to me that instead of taking this seriously he reached > for teleology as a kind of Alka-Seltzer for the soul. In other words > rather > the face up to the uncertainty implied in an undefined path, he chose to > call it Quality and treat it as a kind of Omega Point which comes from > Teilhard de Chardin and is much abused by Wilber. To me this is a > regression > to the Aristotelian notion of purpose or final cause. This bit of > absurdity > should have been abandoned in the 1600's with Bacon and the advent of > natural philosophy but as we can see some habits of thought die hard. > > > > > 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
