Quoting ARLO J BENSINGER JR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > [Platt] > Please notice the past tense: "they've done so . . ." > > [Arlo] > Which says nothing to the statement that "it's "better" and that this > definition of "betterness" â this beginning response to Dynamic > Quality...""
Past tense, over, done with, happened once -- get it? The statement speaks about the creation of life by inorganic patterns, a beginning response to DQ. > You keep saying "I can't answer these questions", but that's simply avoidance. I don't say that. I say read Chapter 11 of Lila. There you will find your answers. > As to "when a cat became a cat", its a matter of biological evolution. There > was a time when a given pattern was not a cat, and a time when it was. The > difference is biological. Can a "given patten" be both a cat and not a cat. I don't so. > And it is that "difference" which you can't answer at all from your view. > Could > animals ever respond to DQ? That's a simple yes or no. If they could, what was > the difference between "animals then" and "animals now"? All this avoidance is > simply to give "man" some false transcendence of the cosmos. Only in your mind. But that man is higher in the moral hierarchy there is no doubt. > You say quite adamantly that "animals can not respond to DQ". I ask "could > they > ever?". Speculate on how they differed? You avoid this because the only answer > that makes any sense is that they could respond to DQ biologically then just > as > they can now. The difference in man is not "responding to DQ", but "responding > to DQ from the vantage of the social and intellectual levels of which his > "self" is constructed". Boy, you do go off on tangents and come to weird conclusions don't you, ascribing all sorts of devious motives to me. > Because if it is some biological trait that sets man apart, then animals NOR > ANYTHING ELSE could have ever responded to DQ. And if animals could have > repsonded to DQ at one time, then they must have had the biology to enable > this. Did they lose it? And again, how did they behave any differently? Who said anything about a biological trait setting man apart? Ever here of the social and intellectual levels, much less the passage of time? > If you say that at one time DQ was experienced by animals through their > biology, but that this was lost when man "invented" social patterns, I ask > "did > animals in North America lose their ability to respond to DQ when man in > Africa > developed social patterns"? "If I say . . ." Your imagination is working overtime. > These are the inconsistencies and illogical things you bring into play with > your claim. So try to answer them, Platt. Or think about why you can't. And if > you want to speculate a few answers, and toss them around, I'm game. In the > meantime, we've said our two bits. What is my claim? That my cat's behavior is governed by its static patterns of value. That's what I claim. Otherwise I simply agree with Pirsig: "By contrast the Metaphysics of Quality, also going back to square one, says that man is composed of static levels of patterns of evolution with a capability of response to Dynamic Quality." (Lila, 24) Now if you will be so good to answer these questions you have avoided: You seem to make two assumptions about DQ. First, that if something can't be predicted it must be a response to DQ. Second, if it moves, it must be responding to DQ. Is this correct? ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ 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/
