LS Re: Quality Event


Hettinger (hettingr@iglou.com)
Mon, 17 Nov 1997 18:14:01 +0100


Hi!
Bo, many thanks for the "red pencil". I have used most of it. A couple of things I
want to talk about, some of which have to do with Diana's FAQ questions as well.

Bodvar Skutvik wrote:

> Maggie, here is my contribution (the passages in your letter that I
> have omitted are just fine): For some reason I have become connected
> with the Quality Event expression (the title of my essay probably),
> but this is very much a ZMM thing: the mystic Pirsig. In LILA he
> doesn't speak so much about QE and I believe it is because the
> passage "...the event at which the subject becomes aware of the
> object..etc." has some heavy subject/object connotations. In the MOQ
> proper it is replaced by the dynamic/static value division. Well, I
> bring out my "red pencil" and make the following corrections to your
> "Brief Background" foreword:
>
> (it finally became so cluttered that I rewrote it).
>
> Brief background of Metaphysics of Quality (MoQ).

> (Please note that the terms 'value', 'quality', 'morals', and 'good' are
> interchangeable).

I left the above sentence out of my paper. This was due to the fact that my readers,
who have absolutely NO experience with MoQ, might have been turned off at the beginning,
because this is too big a step at first. However, I am going to suggest it for the
FAQ, because when I read it, it seemed to re-orient my thinking, pull all my stray
focuses (foci?) together in a powerful way.

> MoQ involves a way of perceiving reality, quite
> different from the subject/object viewpoint that underlies Western
> thinking and language. The first proposition of MoQ is that
> everything is value, and that the primary division is between
> dynamic- and static value, not between subjects and objects.

> The
> undifferentiated, undefined, pre-existing source of all things is
> referred to as Dynamic Quality, but in this undifferentiated "ocean"
> there has formed sets of stable "wave patterns" of which the
> first is the material universe itself.

This ocean and wave simile is awesome. I think it's perfect for beginners, too.

> The MoQ recognizes four such
> discrete value patterns (other terms are: 'levels', 'dimensions' and
> 'areas'). They are in rising order of good:

> 1. Static Inorganic Value (Matter)
> 2. Static Biological Value (Life)
> 3. Static Social Value (Societies)
> 4. Static Intellectual Value (Ideas)

I really like the one-word definitions. In speaking to a beginner, that's the way to
go.

I'm going to push back on "Societies". The more I look at the social level, the more I
think it's not societies that comprise this level, but the particular types of
behavior--mores and habits, unconscious imitation--that are this level's "substance".
In describing this I am stuck with

3. Static Social Value (Socially proscribed interactions and reactions)

The closest one-word description I can find is "Habits". There's got to be something
better, something that includes the connotation of "imitation", but my thesaurus is no
help.

Note: This is one of the concepts that really excites me within MoQ. We have this
entire evolutionary level that is practically invisible within our language and our
ideas. When its effects are mixed in with the effects of the biological and the
intellectual, as they usually are, we have so much contradiction and lack of pattern.
When separated out, directions and results are infinitely clearer.

Of course, it may be the reason I can't put a one-word label on the social level is that
it's the level I am most involved with.
;-)

-----------------------------
I really needed to see these listed with intellectual level on top, so I flipped them,
and (using tabs instead of lines) indented.

____________________4. Static Intellectual Value (Ideas)
______________3. Static Social Value (Socially proscribed interactions and
reactions)
_______2. Static Biological Value (Life)
1. Static Inorganic Value (Matter)

>
>
> > The Quality Event (QE) is the point at which....
>

I decided to leave the Quality Event completely out of the introduction. If I actually
use QE in my paper, it will have to be pointed to, but what it IS might have to be
inferred from use, because any explanation will turn off the reader. Perhaps I can
talk about it later in the paper. If, after reading, the person sees the value of the
concept, I can send them to Pirsig.
This wording is from james mccabe:

>Each of these levels offers freedom from the constraints of the lower parent level, but
each >is also dependent on that parent level for its existence. There are five types of
struggle >between different levels of Quality: chaotic-inorganic, inorganic-biological,
>biological-social, social-intellectual, and static-dynamic.

This piece is from Pirsig: (thanks!)

"This last, the Dynamic-static code, says what's good in life isn't defined by society
or intellect or biology. What's good is freedom from domination by any static pattern,
but that freedom doesn't have to be obtained by the destruction of the patterns
themselves." (Pirsig)

I'm following up with the "introduction" I settled on. I took the thing to class last
week, talked briefly, then gave everyone (8 people) a copy. Today, when I go to class,
I'll see whether anyone read it. (current version:
http://members.iglou.com/sbullitt/LF/main.html)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brief background of Metaphysics of Quality (MoQ).

 MoQ involves a way of perceiving reality, quite different from the subject/object
viewpoint that underlies Western thinking and language. The first proposition of MoQ is
that everything is value, and that the primary division is between dynamic value and
static value, not between subjects and objects. The undifferentiated, undefined,
pre-existing source of all things is referred to as Dynamic Quality, but in this
undifferentiated "ocean" there has formed sets of stable "wave patterns" of which the
first is the material universe itself. The MoQ recognizes four such discrete value
patterns (other terms are: 'levels', 'dimensions' and 'areas'). They are, in rising
order of good:

....................... 4. Static Intellectual Value (Ideas)
...............3. Static Social Value (Socially proscribed interactions and reactions)

........2. Static Biological Value (Life)
1. Static Inorganic Value (Matter)

 Each of these levels offers freedom from the constraints of the lower parent level, but
each is also dependent on that parent level for its existence. There are five types of
struggle between different levels of Quality: chaotic-inorganic, inorganic-biological,
biological-social,
 social-intellectual, and static-dynamic.

 "This last, the Dynamic-static code, says what's good in life isn't defined by society
or intellect or biology. What's good is freedom from domination by any static pattern,
but that freedom doesn't have to be obtained by the destruction of the patterns
themselves." (Pirsig)

 (This is a very brief summary. The original concept is found in Lila, An Inquiry into
Morals, Robert M. Pirsig, 1991 ISBN 0-553-07737-6)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anything here that jumps out as just plain wrong?

When I follow through with this project, I want to attribute to the Lila Squad. How is
this done? Directly or generally? Do you want me to?

Many thanks for your many truths,

Maggie

--
post message - mailto:skwok@spark.net.hk
unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com
homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:14 CEST