Hi all,
What is a level?
I had intended to get something on this topic out sooner, but real life has been
something of a
constraint recently. I had a number of queries in my mind as to what a level was, in
Pirsig's
account of the MoQ. Most of them have now been answered by Rick's post, which made a
lot of sense to
me. But my main underlying interest is in finding out if we can get some consensus on
what sort of
thing might constitute a level, what sort of thing a level is - and those who know my
point of view
will understand why I ask the question. This post gives my answer.
Pirsig describes the MoQ as being a study of static latches, or static Quality. I
think the first
(obvious) thing to say about what a level is, is precisely this: that it is a
description or
classification of static Quality (ie Quality statically latched); more precisely, it
is a
description of particular classes of patterns of value, so: (static) reality is
composed of patterns
of value, these can be classified in the following way etc.
Secondly, Pirsig does arrange the levels in a hierarchy, with the higher levels being
more 'moral'
than the lower. This is a part of his evolutionary stance, that over time, Quality
becomes more and
more 'present', ('statically latched'?). So there is an ascent from the inorganic to
the biological
to the social to the fourth level. This ascent is led by DQ, and is geared around
freedom, "A
primary occupation of every level of evolution seems to be offering freedom to lower
levels of
evolution."
Thirdly, although Pirsig says that the levels are discrete, they are not _absolutely_
discrete, in
other words, there are ways in which they relate to each other. "They all operate at
the same time
and in ways that are ALMOST independent of each other." (ch 12, my emphasis). The way
that they
relate is through a 'machine language interface' (from his analogy with computers),
"the biological
patterns of life and the molecular patterns of organic chemistry have a 'machine
language' interface
called DNA." (ch 12 again).
Fourthly, there is a 'purpose' involved at each level. (Perhaps this could be
redescribed as saying,
DQ operates or is experienced differently at each level?) So Pirsig writes, "A primary
occupation of
every level of evolution seems to be offering freedom to lower levels of evolution.
But as the
higher level gets more sophisticated it goes off on purposes of its own." I don't
think Pirsig
explicitly says this anywhere, but it seems to me that this 'purpose' can be expressed
in terms of
laws, eg the law of physics at the inorganic level; the law of natural selection at
the biological
level. Pirsig does, however, go on to talk about the different levels emerging to give
more freedom
in the context of those laws, "One could almost define life as the organized
disobedience of the law
of gravity", "This would explain why patterns of life do not change solely in accord
with causative
'mechanisms' or 'programs' or blind operations of physical laws. They do not just
change
valuelessly. They change in ways that evade, override and circumvent these laws. The
patterns of
life are constantly evolving in response to something 'better' than that which these
laws have to
offer." (ch 11)
Fifthly, at least if we go from the DNA example, there seems scope for suggesting that
there is a
particular pattern, (closely related to the static latch which is the 'machine
language interface'),
which is the primary 'vehicle' for the operation of DQ at each level, ie the
'migration of static
patterns toward Dynamic Quality'. "Biological evolution can be seen as a process by
which weak
Dynamic forces at a subatomic level discover stratagems for overcoming huge static
inorganic forces
at a superatomic level. They do this by selecting superatomic mechanisms in which a
number of
options are so evenly balanced that a weak Dynamic force can tip the balance one way
or another. The
particular atom that the weak Dynamic subatomic forces have seized as their primary
vehicle is
carbon"; "What the Dynamic force had to invent in order to move up the molecular level
and stay
there was a carbon molecule that would preserve its limited Dynamic freedom from
inorganic laws and
at the same time resist deterioration back to simple compounds of carbon again." (ch
11)
It seems to me that these are aspects (doubtless not all the aspects) of what sort of
thing a level
is. So a level in the MoQ is: a classification of static patterns of value that fits
into the
hierarchy of evolution led by DQ, which relates to the other levels via a 'machine
language
interface' and whose purpose can be classified according to a particular 'law' or
'laws', and which
is most easily understood by consideration of the 'vehicle' on which DQ operates.
Anyone care to refine this formulation?
Sam
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_focus/
MF Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/mf/subscribe.html
