Re: MD levels

From: Steve Peterson (speterson@fast.net)
Date: Thu Nov 07 2002 - 16:56:04 GMT

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD levels"

    Wim writes:
    > The levels represent different types of patterns of values.

    Steve says:
    Pirsig extended the definition of what is real by defining reality in terms
    of patterns of Value rather than matter and energy to include such "ghosts"
    as the laws of science, which have no matter or energy, among the real.

    Then a rock is a pattern of value.
    A pattern of inorganic value, would you say?

    A cell is a pattern of value.
    A pattern of biological value you say? Only biological value???

    And a human being is a collection of these cells. A pattern of patterns.
    Is a human being only a biological pattern of value?

    The earth is another collection of patterns of value and thus a pattern of
    value itself, right? Then which kind?

    Everything is patterns within patterns. If you try to work in the other
    direction and reduce the patterns to categorizable bits, you'll end up
    reducing to oblivion.

    I can understand four types of Value and reality as patterns of Value, but I
    don't think it makes sense to try to force the patterns formed out of these
    four types of Value back into the four distinct types. Patterns of value
    contain multiple types of Value and so cannot be neatly categorized.

    >Static quality
    > is the value of maintaining these patterns, it is the value of their
    > stability. Dynamic Quality is the value of changing them (which is to be
    > distinguished from their destruction/decay/degeneration), it is the value of
    > their versatility/adaptability. Some patterns of values change more easily
    > (in the right direction) than others, BOTH because of a different balance
    > between stability and versatility/adaptability (which is a measure of
    > intra-level differences in Quality) AND because they are maintained/latched
    > in different ways (which determines their belonging to different 'levels').

    Wim writes:
    > An inorganic pattern of values (experience of 'materialishness') is
    > maintained/latched by unequal probability distributions in the quantum
    > behavior of subatomic particles.
    > A biological pattern of values (experience of 'life') is maintained/latched
    > by DNA stabilized by protein structures around it.
    > A social pattern of values (experience of 'culture/tradition/habit') is
    > maintained/latched by unconscious copying of behavior.
    > An intellectual pattern of values (experience of 'truth/meaning/reality') is
    > maintained/latched by conscious motivation/justification of actions in a way
    > that is acceptable to others.
    >
    Steve says:
    These "experiences of" sound like levels of awareness to me.
    My point is that we can have all four kinds of awareness of the same pattern
    of value. We can value a particular pattern in four ways (at least). In
    fact, the experience itself is defined by awareness of Value.

    Wim says:
    > 'The levels are a way of distinguishing the different types of patterns of
    > values by the different amounts of Dynamic Quality inherent in the way in
    > which they are maintained/latched'.
    > Would you agree with that?

    Steve says:
    I can't respond because I don't accept the premise of "types of patterns of
    value."

    Wim says:
    > As 'Pirsig does equate "consciousness" with the intellectual level' (Sam
    > 6/11 8:07 -0000) I do NOT like Platt's addition (5/11 16:32 -0500) to the
    > MoQ 'to claim that the levels represent increasing levels of awareness
    > (consciousness)'. Platt's addition implies that 'consciousness' is a
    > phenomenon that operates across levels that can be used to compare all
    > levels. Pirsig's equation of 'consciousness' with ONLY the intellectual
    > level implies that it does NOT operate on the lower levels and can only be
    > used to compare the intellectual level with all other levels taken together.

    Steve:
    But animals that have no societal or intellectual awareness are still aware
    in another way, right? We might find common ground if we think of
    consciousness as a special kind of awareness. Intellectual awareness.
    Self-awareness.

    Steve

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 07 2002 - 16:47:43 GMT