From: Matthew Poot (mattpoot@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Mar 31 2004 - 21:17:19 BST
Platt,
I am in the process of freeing myself
Poot
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Peterson <peterson.steve@verizon.net>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 2:29 PM
Subject: Re: MD What have you freed lately?
> Hi Platt, Leland, Mark, all,
>
>
> On Mar 30, 2004, at 4:35 PM, Platt Holden wrote:
> >
> > "Dynamic Quality is the pre-intellectual cutting edge of realty, the
> > source of all things, completely simple and always new. It was the
> > moral
> > force that had motivated the brujo in Zuni. It contains no pattern of
> > fixed rewards and punishments. Its only perceived good is freedom and
> > its
> > only perceived evil is static quality itself—any pattern of one-sided
> > fixed values that tries to contain and kill the ongoing free force of
> > life." (Lila-9)
> >
> > Of all the passages in Lila, none is more significant than this one. It
> > describes how Pirsig views the mysterious mystic force he calls Dynamic
> > Quality.
> > First, it is a force, an energy, drawing all creatures great and small
> > towards betterness.
> > Second, it created and continues to create everything new under the
> > sun.
> > Third, its highest good is freedom from static patterns.
> >
> > So I keep asking myself, "What have you freed from a static pattern
> > lately?" Unfortunately I can only answer, "Nothing special."
> >
> > Perhaps in raising two children I’ve had a hand in freeing them from
> > the
> > static patterns of childhood dependency. That’s about it, but at least
> > it’s something.
> >
> > What patterns have you broken? What have you set free? How have you
> > responded to DQ? Is there a brujo among us?
> >
>
> Pirsig had something else to say about freedom in his afterword to ZAMM:
> "The hippies had in mind something that they wanted, and were calling
> it ``freedom,'' but in the final analysis ``freedom'' is a purely
> negative goal. It just says something is bad. Hippies weren't really
> offering any alternatives other than colorful short-term ones, and some
> of these were looking more and more like pure degeneracy. Degeneracy
> can be fun but it's hard to keep up as a serious lifetime occupation."
>
> DQ puts freedom in a positive light. The DQ/sq split suggests how we
> don't necessarily have to speak in negative terms about freedom since
> freedom can lead to dynamic improvement. We always knew that there was
> something good about freedom. The MOQ helps us to articulate it.
>
> However, Pirsig's connection between degeneracy and freedom still
> applies. Though from the DQ perspective all static patterns are evil,
> there is no dynamic improvement without static latching as Leland
> pointed out.
>
> I think this is where Mark's thinking about dynamic-static tension and
> sq-sq coherence comes in. From each static level's perspective every
> other level is evil as is DQ in it's ongoing assault on the stability
> of static patterns. From the DQ perspective every static pattern is
> evil. It is only from the Quality perspective that the two are
> reconciled in the whole of the One. Freedom may be the highest good
> from the DQ perspective, but from the Quality perspective, DQ is only
> one kind of Good that needs to be integrated into a "sweet spot."
>
> Pirsig said "This book offers another, more serious alternative to
> material success...It gives a positive goal to work toward that does
> not confine." There is a positive goal (sweet spot) because of static
> latching of betterness. Without the static latching, DQ could only be
> understood in negative terms rather than in terms of betterness.
>
> Talking about DQ, freedom, and mystical experience alone without static
> latching seems to me like the Hippie's talk in that it's not any real
> alternative to static patterns since there is no way to be a living
> being and be literally free of static patterns. It just doesn't make
> sense to think of freedom from all static patterns as absolute good.
> Perhaps DQ, freedom, and mystical experience perhaps can be fun but
> hard to keep up as a serious lifetime occupations. I've never had a
> mystical experience, so I don't know.
>
> Anyway, breaking static patterns does not necessarily increase freedom.
> In fact, doing so can decrease freedom, so I think "what have you
> freed?" needs to be clarified. Freeing a sick patient from germs is
> good, but freeing your 13-year old from her curfew could be
> catastrophic.
>
> If we want to talk about freedom as a positive as we Americans love to
> do, we should be talking about freedom to flourish or something like
> Mark's sweet spot rather than freedom from all static patterns.
> Instead of being a negative, I would define MOQ informed freedom as the
> condition of openness to dynamic improvement.
>
> Social conservatives can argue that society's laws help make us free
> since we could not flourish as human beings without society. Liberal's
> can talk about how to create the conditions for more people to
> flourish. Perhaps the two groups could even find some common goals if
> they can begin to see freedom in a positive light as the sweet spot in
> a DQ/sq relationship.
>
> Thanks,
> Steve
>
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward -
http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 : Wed Mar 31 2004 - 21:31:15 BST