[Platt] Lila exists as a unique pattern. There's only one Lila, and only one Arlo.
[Arlo] With minds united as the cells of a body are united, and with unique experience from our bodily-kinesthetic "reality". [Platt] No, this is static biological pattern, predictable, repeatable. Nothing good or wondrous about it. [Arlo] Watch your cat sometime, Platt. Do you feel it is a slave to predictable, static biological patterns? Can you can not act "dynamically", that is move towards "it's better here"? Mine can. The cutting edge of experience is not static, but Dynamic, and it is this cutting edge (DQ) that a dog, and a cat, respond to on the biological level. Tell me, though, if only humans can respond to DQ, what responded to DQ before humans arrived? Did they loose their ability to respond to DQ as biological patterns because somewhere else social patterns emerged? [Platt] My cat has a self, a very individual, unique self. You don't have to be human to be a self. A dog's response to a fire is not DQ; it's a static biological pattern. [Arlo] I have no idea how you reconcile those two statements. You cat has no concept of "self", it responds only biologically. It has no culture, and therefore it does not think, and therefore it has no "I am". [Platt] All well and good, but hard-to-comprehend language is hardly the vehicle to move us there. You will note Pirsig's moves us toward something better using plain, simple, S/O based language. No reason why we all can't follow his example. [Arlo] There is a difference between using S/O language and reifying a S/O metaphysics. Pirsig's "self" (or subject) does not exist apart from the world (object), they are mutually containing. 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/
