James McCabe (fursey@slip.net)
Fri, 19 Dec 1997 10:41:28 +0100
Hi,
Before the Christmas hiatus I thought I would offer some comments
on the various formulations of the MoQ at
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670/principia.html
Like Diana I think it is a good idea to focus on basic principles,
rather than shooting out random views all the time. My remarks
are partly criticisms, partly questions. (Questions are dynamic;
answers are static.) As a disclaimer, let me
say that I admire the thought that has gone into forming these
principles, and I would not criticize them unless I thought them
to be of value, so I hope nobody is offended by my "attacks".
I hope that all the issues involved in these bodies of principles
will be thrashed about for a while, before the squad creates a
tablet of stone. In fleeing chaos there is always a danger of
tripping and falling into the pit of orthodoxy.
Forgive me for not presenting my own body of principles but my
thinking is far from settled and I am not sure yet if it is in perfect
harmony with the MoQ.
___
> Principles, by D McPartlin
> 1. Quality is nature of reality.
Yes, but what is difference between "Quality is the nature of
reality" and "Quality is reality"? See also Magnus' definition.
> 2. The best way to split Quality is into dynamic
> and static patterns.
> 3. Dynamic quality is better than static quality.
This seems to be same as saying, "Dynamic quality has more
quality than static quality," which is an error of categories.
> 4. The best way to split static quality is into
> patterns of inorganic matter, biology, society and
> intellect.
> 5. The order of static morality from lowest to
> highest is inorganic, biological, social then
> intellectual
> 6. The purpose of Quality is to do what is moral
Is there not some redundancy in these terms - "Quality,"
"purpose," "moral"? The relationship between these terms
needs to be expressed very carefully, I think.
> Principles, by M Striz
> What is Quality?
> It's 'now,' the pre-intellectual cutting edge of
> experience. It is also goodness and truth. The
> sanskrit word is 'arete.'
If Quality is pre-intellectual, does this doom the intellectual
and the post-intellectual to non-Quality? Or is it merely
dynamic Quality that is pre-intellectual?
> What is the Metaphysics of Quality?
> Metaphysics is a broad philosophical view of
> reality, usually entailing ontology, epistemology,
> and ethics. The Metaphysics of Quality is the
> view that Quality is the primary empirical reality,
> that reality is a moral order, that things are
> patterns of values derived from the experience of
> Quality.
> What else does the MOQ say?
> In the view of the MOQ, the cutting edge of
> experience and source of all things is Dynamic
> Quality, the post-experience construction of these
> values is static quality.
> What's Dynamic Quality?
> It is that pre-intellectual nowness that creates
> existence, that IS existence. It is unknown,
> chaotic, fresh, and new.
> What's static quality?
> It is all the post-intellectual value patterns we
> construct.
Does this mean that all static patterns have an intellectual component?
That they need to be perceived to exist?
> It's often boring and predictable, but
I would say always predictable - that predictability is an
identifying characteristic of static patterns.
> most importantly it is stable and the basis of our
> knowledge(1) of existence. There are four primary
> levels of static quality, based on the rules/morals
> that govern those values on each of those levels.
> These are physical, biological, social, and
> intellectual. What is moral for one level may not
> be for another, they interact and conflict or help
> each other out. With the impulse of Dynamic
> Quality, static qualities evolve.
> (1) I make a distinction between experience and knowledge. Experience is
> the pre-intellectual awareness of values, knowledge is the post-intellectual
> awareness.
> Principles, by K Clark
> The Metaphysics of Quality is the guiding
> principle that is continuously operating to lead
Surely Quality is the guiding principle, and the MoQ is a formulation.
> Humanity on to higher levels of Ethics and
> Morals. It is the cutting edge of awareness that
> expands consciousness. It results in a continuous
> increase in the level of Static Quality that serves
> as a goal for the mass of humanity.
> Principles, by M Berg
> 1. The Quality principle
> Quality is the origin of reality.
>
This leads to the question of what reality itself is...
> Reality is the result of Quality Events.
If reality is a "result," does this mean that we get it
secondhand? Perhaps that is the precise inversion made by
the MoQ - it subordinates reality to (consciousness),
rather than (consciousness) to reality.
> Quality Events are, from within
> reality, often called observations.
Is perception an integral part of the Quality Event? If so we
need to say that the facility of perception exists in all things,
albeit at very low levels. "Everything is conscious" - pantheism!
> 2. The Dynamic-static split
> The first split of Quality is into dynamic and static
> quality. Dynamic quality is conceptually unknown,
> chaos, freedom, change. Static quality is
> conceptually known, order, captivity, stability.
> Both are needed. Without dynamic quality, things
> cannot grow. Without static quality, things cannot
> last.
> 3. The four static levels
> Static quality is divided into four discrete levels:
> inorganic, organic, social and intellectual.
> Examples of patterns of these levels are matter,
> cells, societies and thought respectively.
> 4. Static conflict
> Each level use the next lower for its own
> purposes. By doing this, it gains more freedom
> than the lower level.
> 5. Static dependency
> Although the higher level use the lower level to
> gain more freedom, it is also dependent on it and
> must not destroy it. If it does, it is destroyed along
> with the lower.
> 6. The hierarchy of morality
> The physical order of the universe is also the
> moral order of the universe. Each pattern that
> uses lower level patterns has a moral right to do
> so, because it can.
This last idea needs to be distinguished from such views as "Might is
right" and "Everything that is, is right".
> Principles, by D Thomas
> Presented visually
> Principles, by A McWatt
> 1. What is metaphysics?
> Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy that
> examines the nature of reality, including the
> relationship between mind and matter, substance
> and attribute, fact and value.
> 2. What is the "Metaphysics of Quality" (MOQ)?
> The Metaphysics of Quality is a theory developed
> by Robert Pirsig to describe and explain the
> nature of Quality (and its synonym Value).
> 3. What does Pirsig mean by the term "Quality"?
> Well, in "Lila" he states that it is "the first slice of
> undivided experience" ("Lila", Bantam Press,
> 1991, P.111).
I appreciate that Pirsig said this, but I still can't see how the
static side of Quality can be identified with raw experience.
> That is to say immediate experience BEFORE
> any division the mind may make before internal or
> external states.
> 4. So what is meant by "immediate experience"?
> Immediate refers to the present or to be more
> technical where time t = 0.
> Experience, in this context, is an awareness of the
> changing flux of reality. Therefore, immediate
> experience means "awareness of the changing flux
> of reality at time t = zero".
> 5. Pirsig divides Quality (or "immediate
> experience") into "Dynamic Quality" and "static
> quality". So how is Dynamic Quality differentiated
> from static quality?
> Dynamic Quality is the term given by Pirsig to the
> continually changing flux of immediate reality while
> static quality refers to anything abstracted from
> this flux.
> Dynamic Quality refers to the divine in experience
> and can only be understood properly through
> direct apprehension. Hence the use of the term
> "dynamic" which indicates something not fixed or
> determinate. Ultimately, it is apparent that
> Dynamic Quality can`t be defined and that true
> understanding of it can only be given through a
> mystic experience such as enlightenment.
> 6. So what is static quality then?
> By static Pirsig doesn`t refer to something that
> lacks movement in the Newtonian sense of the
> word but is referring to any repeated arrangement
> whether "inorganic" (e.g. chemicals), "organic"
> (e.g. plants), "social" (e.g. ant nests) or
> "intellectual" (e.g. ideas)i.e. any pattern that
> appears long enough to be noticed within the flux
> of immediate experience.
> 7. How do these four static patterns of quality
> relate?
> The MOQ recognizes that the four static patterns
> of quality are related through EVOLUTION. If
> the Big Bang is taken as the starting point of the
> universe, it is seen that at this point of time there
> were only inorganic quality patterns. That is to say
> chemicals and quantum forces.
> Since then, at successive stages of history, plants
> and animals have evolved from inorganic patterns,
> societies have evolved from biological patterns,
> and intellect has evolved from societies.
Then you are saying that the concept of evolution is central to
dynamic quality. I have not yet seen an examination of the operation
of DQ: ideally it would be addressed briefly in the final
Pricipia/FAQ: "What are the characteristic ways by which DQ brings
about progression from one level to the next?"
> 8. Why is evolution an important consideration in
> the MOQ?
> Though each level of static patterns have emerged
> from the one below, each level follows its own
> different laws i.e. there are physical laws such as
> gravity (inorganic), the laws of the jungle
> (biology), co-operation between animals
> (society), and the ideas of freedom and rights
> (intellect). It is important to note that the different
> laws of the four static levels often clash e.g.
> adultery (biological good) v. family stability (social
> good).
> 9. How is a code of ethics generated from these
> four levels?
> The MOQ combines the four levels of patterns to
> produce one overall moral framework based on
> evolutionary development. The entity that has
> more freedom on the evolutionary scale (i.e. the
> one that is more Dynamic) is the one that takes
> moral precedence. So, for instance, a human
> being is seen as having moral precedence over a
> dog because a human being is at a higher level of
> evolution.
> 10. So what`s the value of such a moral
> framework?
> By removing morals from social convention and
> placing them on a scientifically based theory of
> evolution the MOQ removes much of the cultural
> subjectivity that is inherent in many ethical beliefs.
> Moreover, by the use of evolution, the MOQ
> brings together things previously difficult to relate
> such as mind and matter.
> Finally, though it may be argued that a
> metaphysics that incorporates a central term that
> isn`t defined (i.e. Dynamic Quality) isn`t a real
> metaphysics, it can also be argued that the
> strength of the MOQ is its ability to incorporate
> the indeterminate divine within a coherent and
> logical paradigm.
> Principles, by M Hettinger
> 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.
I might say, "most useful division," though that implies a certain
view of truth.
> 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:
> Static Inorganic Value (Matter)
> Static Biological Value (Life)
> Static Social Value (Socially proscribed
> interactions and reactions)
> Static Intellectual Value (Ideas)
> 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. The definition of the area of
> struggle in which an entity functions may have
> more to say about its reality than any of its
> objective qualities. The five areas are:
> 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)
--------------------
Generally, I think that if we are to involve ourselves with
definitions, then we should show how Quality is related to the
following four concepts at least: "reality," "truth," "consciousness,"
and "morality". In this way the MoQ can show that it is addressing
the principal concerns of philosophy: metaphysics, epistemology,
phenomenology, and ethics.
Happy Christmas,
James McCabe.
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com 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 - 16:42:26 CEST