Hettinger (hettingr@iglou.com)
Wed, 7 Jan 1998 20:46:59 +0100
Hi, LS and Platt,
Platt, I think you have succeeded in pulling this together. I find Principles
meaningful, relevant and a big step for MoQ. I have made a few small
comments below, but think you have hit this nail squarely on the head.
Thank you!
Platt Holden wrote:
>
>
> Principles of the Metaphysics of Quality
>
> 1. The Quality Principle. Quality is simultaneously an immanent and
> transcendent moral force. It created and gave purpose to our world,
> motivated by the ethical principle of the "Good" which is its essence.
> Quality is synonymous with "morality" and "value." Thus, the world is
> primarily a moral order, consisting not of subjects (mental things) and
> objects (material things) but patterns of value.
>
Yes.
> 2. The Awareness Principle. The essence of quality is known to us as
> awareness without content—pure, unpatterned experience. As such, it's
> impossible to describe. Whenever we try, we end up describing what we are
> aware of, not awareness itself.
>
When you publish this one, I think it would be good to replace the dash
following the word "content" with a double dash. In some type settings, like
the one that my computer uses when it prints on paper, the dash is presented as
a hyphen--making an adjective ("content-pure") and changing the meaning
entirely.
> 3. The Dynamic/Static Principle. To explain the inexplicable, the
> Metaphysics of Quality divides quality into two parts, Dynamic and Static.
> Dynamic Quality is the moral imperative to create; Static Quality is the
> moral imperative to survive.
>
Yes.
> 4. The Levels Principle. Quality became manifest in our world by an
> evolutionary sequence of Dynamic Quality Events. Left in the wake of these
> events were four static levels of evolution—inorganic, biological, social
> and intellectual. Each level is a static pattern of Quality, organized and
> governed by its own unique moral laws—the laws of physics, biology, culture
> and reason respectively.
May I suggest one small change?:
Each level is a set of similar types of patterns of Quality, each level
governed by its own unique moral laws...
> 5. The Awareness Hierarchy Principle. Each higher level evolved from and
> included the lower but expanded awareness. For example, the intellectual
> level can apprehend mathematical patterns that the lower levels cannot.
> Also, all levels possess, in addition to environmental awareness, an
> awareness of values. Even a lowly virus knows what's good for it.
>
Yes!
> 6. The Moral Hierarchy Principle. Because higher levels are more aware,
> they are more moral than levels below. Intellectual patterns take moral
> precedence over social patterns, social patterns over biological and
> biological patterns over inorganic.
>
Yes!
> 7. The First Dominance Principle. Because a lower level is largely unaware
> of levels above it, it considers itself to be the most moral and strives to
> dominate other levels. What is moral and lawful at one level is often
> immoral and unlawful at another. For example, biological laws defy the laws
> of physics.
>
Yes!
> 8. The Second Dominance Principle. Static patterns within levels that
> humans identify as entities are possessed by varying degrees of Quality
> depending on their affinity to the next higher or lower level. They often
> try to devour other patterns to enhance their own survival. This causes
> suffering, the negative face of Quality that drives the creative process.
>
Yes! "Affinity". That's a good word for this.
> 9. The Dependency Principle. When a higher level attempts to assert its
> moral dominance over a lower level, it must be careful that it does not
> endanger the stability of the lower level on which it ultimately depends
> for survival. For example, if the intellect in its quest for freedom from
> social inhibitions causes social instability, intellect will suffer.
>
Yes.
> 10. The Individual Principle. At the present stage of moral evolution, only
> living beings can respond to Dynamic Quality. Humans, composites of all
> four levels, are the most capable of responding. However, responses to and
> evaluations of Quality vary by individual because each has a different
> static pattern of life history.
>
Yes.
> 11. The Truth Principle. Truth, an intellectual value pattern, is a species
> of Good. There's no single, exclusive truth, but those of high quality are
> empirical, logical, elegant and brief. In any case, it's immoral for truth
> to be subordinated to social values.
>
Yes.
> 12. The Freedom Principle. To create ever higher levels of awareness,
> Dynamic Quality strives for freedom from all static patterns. Freedom is
> the core value and highest Good in the Metaphysics of Quality. Thus, the
> best social and intellectual patterns are those that promote freedom
> consistent with maintaining the static patterns necessary for survival.
>
Yes.
> 13. The Proof Principle. That reality is morality strikes most people as
> loony. But in denying that the world is a moral order they have to employ
> moral judgment. They cannot refute that Quality is reality without
> asserting a value. And they will have to concede that it's impossible to
> live without assumptions of what is Good. For life requires action, action
> presupposes choice, choice presupposes purpose and purpose presupposes
> values.
>
Here are some other possible principles, that might belong between 8 and 9 .
They are *really* rough, so I don't expect anyone to take them at face value.
If they are not specifically supported by Pirsig in Lila, they may not belong
in Principles, but to me they (or something like them) are a big part of the
value of MoQ.
8.1 The Chunk Principle. (Packet Principle? Mediation? ) Forces in our world
usually tend to be processes that operate within a single level, even those
affecting entities that exist within more than one level. An interaction
within any particular level has its effects on lower levels, but not on
individual patterns. Instead, it mediates (affects) entire sets of
patterns. That interaction itself (the cause?) cannot be perceived by the
patterns of the lower level.
8.2 The Support Principle. An interaction within any particular level has
effects on higher levels, but as support or breaking of support. This is
somehow different than the process described above. (*How is it different?*)
8.3 The Paradigm Principle, or Art. Occasionally, something happens in which
linked forces at different levels affect linked sets of patterns, (mediation
without breaking across multiple evolutionary levels). These effects are often
described as "art" or "paradigm shift". Since they satisfy the needs of
freedom without destruction, these may be the most moral of all.
8.4 Non-Dualism Principle. The transformation of intellectual reality from a
yes/no, true/false, subject/object system to a multi-layered system of patterns
offers us the potential ability to understand previously-incomprehensible
events as sums of distinct interactions, and as such offer the ability to see
"mu" results as something specific.
Whew! That last really felt like work! I'll pin these on my wall and
re-consider them as I type Lila. I'll start on chapter two next week.
Love,
Maggie
-- 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 - 16:42:37 CEST