[Krimel] Frankly I am only interested in about two generations out from here. That is about a far as anyone can project "betterness" and actually mean anything by it.
[Arlo] Okay, you are talking about "betterness" from a human (IBSI) perspective. I think I want to stress that what you perceive as "betterness" is completely outside the experience of an asteroid (to keep our example), which can only respond to "betterness" on the inorganic level. That is, that asteroid is doing what is "better" inorganically (following gravitational patterns, for example). I don't have the exact quote, but Pirsig said along the lines that gravity is a "stable pattern of (inorganic) value". That is, what we perceive of as "gravity" is simply inorganic patterns doing what is "better" inorganically. [Krimel] Is all of human history aimed at helping a stranded Talfamadorian order parts for his space ship? [Arlo] Unlike Platt (I think), I don't see the "Quality-as-Betterness" as being an external "plan". We are not going anywhere deliberately, what we see as a path is only looking out of the back of the car window. But that retrospective path is the "amalgamation" (if you will) of countless inorganic, biological, social and intellectual patterns responding (on their respective levels) to Quality-Betterness. [Krimel] Do I care about the greater good resulting from planetoid collisions? [Arlo] Again, there is no external being planning and causing events for "greater goods". When an asteroid obliterates a biosphere there is no "being" out their deliberating or causing the event for any "greater good". It occurred because inorganic patterns of value were following their own sense of inorganic betterness. Indeed, "inorganically" the aftermath may be much better (e.g., in say the gravitational tension between the two objects is eliminated). The asteroid, nor anything else, has no "greater purpose" in the event other than following inorganic patterns of value. Nor does the resultant changes to the biosphere perceive any "greater good". >From the biological level, likely things got much worse, and the biological patterns adjust (if they are not entirely obliterated) to the new inorganic patterns around them by doing what they have always done, responding to "betterness" from a biological "perspective". It has only been with the advent of social levels of value that "man" has been able to formulate concepts such as "the greater good", which s/he uses to make sense of the past (usually deifying her/his role in the cosmos) or in planning future activity (sometimes good, as in building a library, sometimes bad as in the Holocaust). [Krimel] If betterness involves some cosmic scheme where in we go extinct so that cockroaches finally get their turn I say phooey. [Arlo] If cockroaches get "their turn" it is not because of a cosmic scheme, it would be the result of (speculating) large inorganic changes, resulting in re-adaption of biological patterns. From "our" point of view, this would be very bad. From the inorganic view, it could very well be quite good. From the biological level, so long as biological patterns can survive, it would most likely be an indifferent change. I say "indifferent" because I don't think biological patterns are "better off" today than when the dinosaurs ruled. They are different, sure, but whether I am a human or a raptor (from a biological perspective) is largely mute. Indeed, the "biosphere" got along quite happily without "man" for millions and millions of years. (Unless you jump aboard Micah's Solipsism Train). [Krimel] That's no better than having a drunken Thunder God. [Arlo] I'm hard-pressed to think of anything better than a drunken Thunder God. [Krimel] God, higher consciousness, purpose are outgrowths of emerging from us. They are not drawing us forward. They are not inevitable. They are not preexistant. They are growing out of the expanding collective story we are telling. [Arlo] I agree with this, and I don't think it is at odds with what I am saying. 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/
