Hi David
your last couple emails have contained so much info that i hesitated to
comment right away. and now that i do, i will only confine my comments to
specific points relevant to the four levels and Dynamic Quality.
David:
The fifth moral code governs the balance or ratio of static and
Dynamic. The ratio between these two is different at each level. The
inorganic level is so static that it seems absolutely fixed. It a good
thing that the inorganic level is seemingly 100% static. Anything else
would literally be earth-shattering, if you know waht I mean.
Glove:
i disagree that the inorganic level is seemingly 100% static quality and
would argue if anything, it is 100% Dynamic Quality that we cannot directly
focus on. but i think we would both be wrong. there is no way to say what is
occurring at the quantum level of reality in ways we can conceptualize in
relation to our everyday reality, other than restricting the observation to
one event and applying classical math to the results. size is the
determining factor here, apparently.
David:
Biological
evolution demonstates the Dynamic Quality at work in that level, but
sometimes requires millions or billions of years to occur. The
biological level is relatively stable, but not as static as the
inorganic level.
Glove:
in the biological level, it is a balance between the forces of Dynamic
Quality which allows life to flourish. what may seem static is actually a
very complex interrelated dance back and forth between creation and
discreation.
David:
It follows in a similar way in the third level. The
social level of values, what Cambell and Pirsig call the mythos, is more
dynamic and evolves more quickly than the bio level.
Glove:
the social level creates what we see ourselves as in every way. like Pirsig,
i must confess to a little ignorance about Campbell so i will let others
speak of that.
David:
Naturally the
intellectual level evolves most quickly, is the most dynamic, and is at
the leading edge of the universe's movement toward Dynamic Quality
itself. The fifth moral code says this is as it should be. Each level
needs its own ratio of static and dynamic quality to be moral. And I
think everybody knows that the other four moral codes correspond to the
levels and govern the relationship between them when they conflict.
Glove:
i agree that the intellect level seems more Dynamic than the social level,
but i suspect it is not. rather there are opposing forces of value
underlying each level, and that it is from these forces of value that the
moral conflicts arise, and not from the static patterns of value themselves.
thats what leads me to theorize that the intellect can be viewed as directed
by "discreative" force of value in opposition to "creative" force of value
directing the social.
David:
Try this question as an example;
"What values are in conflict in the current case of the impeachment of
the U.S. President?"
Glove:
normally i shy away from political or religious discussions. i will only add
that even though we all may have our moral judgements about President
Clinton, it is apparent to me that he is an extremely Dynamic individual,
something that cannot be analyzed or quantitized in any way. that is his
strength and at the same time his undoing. i recognize the same thing in the
story of the Zuni brujo, dont you?
best wishes,
glove
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:49 BST