LS Re: FAQ - Metaphysics and all that


Diana McPartlin (diana@asiantravel.com)
Tue, 18 Nov 1997 20:34:33 +0100


Dave Thomas wrote:

> Some suggests in to Diana's FAQ's [brackets]
>
> > What is a metaphysics?
> >
> > A metaphysics is a theory that explains the fundamental nature and [underlying] structure of reality.
>
> Think underlying is important because part of the trap SOM philosophers fell
> into was avoiding, or not clearly stating what their metaphysical base was

Doesn't the word "structure" already imply that it is underlying though? If we
isolate underlying structure then it suggests that there is an overlying structure
too. Sorry for being so pedantic. For what it's worth I thought a lot about
including the word "fundamental" but decided it was necessary to emphasise that it
is the basics or essentials that we are dealing with. I think the underlyingness
that you're getting at is also included in the word "fundamental".

> > What is Quality?
> >
> > Quality is moral value. It may also be described as goodness or right-ness. Quality may also be understood as experience, the pure direct experience of "now
> >
> What is the Metaphysics of Quality?
> >
> > The Metaphysics of Quality is a theory that says that the fundamental
> > nature of reality is that it is moral value (also refered to as Quality,
> > goodness, experience etc). This value is divided first into dynamic and
> > static patterns of value. The static patterns are further divided into
> > four levels of value -- inorganic, biological, social and intellectual.
>
> I have a problem with including "moral""goodness"right-ness" in these basic
> definitions for two reasons:
>
> 1.These words are loaded with all kinds of SOM meaning which will require much
> thought and explanation to clearly convey in MoQ terms, even to TLS.

Yes that these words are loaded with meaning and yes they are difficult to
explain, but I think that's the way things are. The subheading of Lila is "an
inquiry into morals" after all, the moral nature of the world isn't just an aside
it's absolutely central to Pirsig's theory and to leave it out would be
misleading.

>
> 2.Quality(All of reality) has both static & dynamic values these words implies
> there in no "negative" qualities in reality, which is just not so. ie the Lila
> low quality stove example. My Quality shot would be:

But a low value is not the same as a negative value. The MoQ does say that there
are no negative values. From the second page of chap 8:

"There's a principle in physics that if a thing can't be distinguished from
anything else it doesn't exist. to this the Metaphysics of Quality adds a second
principle: if a thing has no value it isn't distinguished from anything else.
Then, putting the two together, *a thing that has no value does not exist*. "

> Quality is value. In the particular sense(ie talking about that dog over
> there), Quality is all the values, elements, characteristics, that make
> something what it is. In the broadest sense (ie talking about the cosmos and
> beyond), Quality is the sum total of all values that makes up reality.
>
> I also do not think we can over emphasize "all" and "value" in making the
> transition from quality to understanding. This leaves the way open for values
> that we as yet do not know to become via DQ.

I'm happy to include something like this, you're right that the allness of Quality
should be mentioned.

> See [brackets]
> >
> > What is static quality?
> >
> > Static quality is what gives order to the world. It provides a latch for
> > the advances made by dynamic quality. It is [all those values which make up the] routine,
> > structure, normality, organization, conformity, the expected, stability,
> > any pheonomenon [that changes imperceptively slow.]
> >
> > What is inorganic quality?
> >
> > Inorganic quality is[all values which are characteristic of] matter. (ie mass, electrons, protons, hardness, chemical properties, charge)
> >
> > What is biological quality?
> >
> > Biological quality is[all values which are characteristic of] life and that which propagates life.

Again I'm sorry for being so picky but I just don't want to include unnecessary
words. Is "all values that are characteristic of life" something different from
"life"? etc. We have already said that quality is value, it just becomes
cumbersome if we have to go restating the entire theory everytime we want to add a
new point. Also it sounds to me like a robot that looked like a human (not AI)
would then be considered life.

> > What is social quality?
> >
> > Social quality is [all values or] phenomenon that propagates social order - laws,
> > institutions, manners, classes, castes, religion, fashions and so on.

And, again, this sounds like values are different from phenomena. But values ARE
phenomena and all phenomena are value, it's confusing if you split them up.

> > What is intellectual quality?
> >
> > Intellectual quality is [all values or] phenomenon that [emanates from the mind of man]
> > [reason] - democracy, freedom of speech, mathematics, philosophy and so on.

Actually Pirsig says that mind is both social and intellectual value patterns.
But, if you don't, er, mind, can we leave discussion of the mind for another day -
that really is a loaded question.

> Which lead to the question someone can surely help me with
>
> Is Pirsig saying that Quality is capable of make the distinction between right
> and wrong?
> If so where does that leave free will?

In Lila Pirsig says that to the extent that we follow static patterns reality is
deterministic and to the extent that we follow dynamic patterns we have free will.
(sorry it's kinda late I don't have time to look up the reference but I'll find it
if you want to pursue this).

Diana

--
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