On Thurs 24 May 2007 10:25 AM SA writes to Jos <snip>
You might be correct. Without going into any of Pirsig's reading material to use as a reference on this point, 'evidence' would be a static pattern. The 'creation' is dynamic. I mean, there is social and intellectual. One or the other (aside from the other levels). So, to see one arising from the other would be dynamic, thus, undefinable. Social and then intellectual, clear-cut distinction, as you say,"...there is just a pattern." Now what of this 'creation', where social is in place, and then evolution points out intellectual level is able to happen on this foundation of social. There is no biological and then evolution jumps to intellectual level. Social level is in-between. Yet, intellect doesn't 'arise' from social. Intellect 'arises' from dynamic quality. Social level 'arises' from dynamic quality. Biological level 'arises' from dynamic quality, etc... So, the 'arisings' are undefinable (dq). That's about as far as I understand this as we speak <snip> Hi SA, Jos, and all, Arguing from Pirsig's insight that there is a necessary connection between levels which becomes the basis for right and wrong, while the 'arisings' are indefinable the connections between levels are not illogical. Because they have arisen they could arise. IMO for this reason I see the social level which evolved from the woman level as the level of proprietary awareness-I am alone. Subjective evolution is now a companion to objective evolution. The next level the intellectual level of law is incomplete without the consideration of its double origin. Law is not based on fiat alone. It is shaped by value and moral validity. Two further levels, the subjective levels of higher emotion, and higher intellect, are simply referred to as enlightenment. Joe > > [Jos] >> > > I think my disagreement is with the notion of >> > "creation", I >> > > dont see evidence to show that one arises from >> the >> > other, for >> > > me there is just a pattern. > > You might be correct. Without going into any of > Pirsig's reading material to use as a reference on > this point, 'evidence' would be a static pattern. The > 'creation' is dynamic. I mean, there is social and > intellectual. One or the other (aside from the other > levels). So, to see one arising from the other would > be dynamic, thus, undefinable. Social and then > intellectual, clear-cut distinction, as you say, > "...there is just a pattern." Now what of this > 'creation', where social is in place, and then > evolution points out intellectual level is able to > happen on this foundation of social. There is no > biological and then evolution jumps to intellectual > level. Social level is in-between. Yet, intellect > doesn't 'arise' from social. Intellect 'arises' from > dynamic quality. Social level 'arises' from dynamic > quality. Biological level 'arises' from dynamic > quality, etc... So, the 'arisings' are undefinable > (dq). That's about as far as I understand this as we > speak. > > > [Jos] >> > Intellect may "cause" society as >> > > much as society "causes" intellect. Remove this >> > cause and effect assumption from the realtionship >> and the >> > need for lines meelts away. They are convenient >> but >> > arbitrary. > > Intellect feeds into society, and society feeds > into intellect, but as for the 'ultimate causing of > one another', well, isn't that NOT a static pattern, > but instead dynamic quality. > > [Jos] >> > My concept of static patterns being created out of >> > a dynamic source is an instantaneous one where >> patterns are >> > constantly refreshed and renewed - its not as a >> factor of >> > time. > > Interesting... for instance, I'll mention > something so seemingly simple. The leaves on a tree > are still. The wind blows and the leaves move. The > static patterns of leaves, aside from their metabolic > processes and cellular regeneration, but the leaves > amidst a larger picture where wind is involved are > leaves that are changing in view. They were still and > then moving about with the wind. That whole event, of > leaves and wind, is a static pattern "...constantly > refreshed and renewed..." I see this as a painting. > The leaves are still - one painting. The leaves move > here - another painting. The leaves move over there - > another painting. Each painting is a static pattern. > So, for each static pattern another painting, a > renewed view: code of art. > As to this factor of time, I'm not sure what you > mean, but since it doesn't have to do with time, then > that might be why I don't know what you mean. > By the way, what I mention with the leaves and > wind, does this come close to what your saying? > > > [Jos] >> > The process of evolution in the material sense can >> > it's-self be regarded as a static pattern. >> Afterall >> natural >> > selection obeys well defined rules and there are >> now >> genetic >> > algorythms used in engineering that successfuly >> mimic >> > evolutionary development - hardly an undefinable >> dynamic force. > > I agree. What you say here is a static pattern. > Dynamic quality alludes me. Is all of this a static > pattern? Natural history is an excellent show of how > dynamic quality is involved. Before monkey's these > lemurs, but before lemurs (which were lastly in Africa > and now only hold out in Madagascar and I believe > somewhere in Asia or an island in the Pacific, I'll > have to look that up, anyways...) these squirrelly > creatures. Yes, it is static patterns appearing, and > all we see are these static patterns, but what of > these unknowns such as death and birth or a garden. > How will this garden of mine pan out at harvest time? > Yes, static patterns are the answer, but dynamic > quality is the question. > > [Jos] >> > > Commuter walked and the driver swore at him. >> > > Pollution was very high. > > > chipmunk goes back and forth from one side of the > house to the other, getting bird-seed stored in the > cheeks and jogging back to his/her hole in the earth > by the garden, > SA > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > The fish are biting. > Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing. > http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php > 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/
