From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sat Apr 26 2003 - 19:59:53 BST
Howdy Paul and y'all:
dmb says:
As I understand it, Paul is having trouble with the compatibility of these
two statements...
Pirsig writes:
Lila is a cohesion of changing static patterns of
Quality. There isn't any more to her than that. Ch 11
Pirsig writes:
Static patterns can't by themselves perceive or adjust
to Dynamic Quality. Only a living being can do that.
Ch 13
Paul said:
So the point is: If you add the statements together,
Lila is no more than a cohesion of static patterns of
Quality, therefore Lila can't perceive or adjust to
Dynamic Quality.
dmb says:
This is easy. The heart of the issue centers on two key phrases: "a cohesion
of static patterns" and "static patterns can't by themselves". Think of the
cohesion as a forest. Elsewhere in the book, Pirsig describes persons as
forests of static patterns, meaning a collection of various static patterns
from various levels. That is the MOQ's definition of people. It is only the
constituent static patterns in isolation, by themselves, that can't respond.
Seen this way, the two statements don't contradict each other in any way.
Paul says:
Therefore, if living beings can perceive or adjust to
Dynamic Quality they must be more than a cohesion of
static patterns of Quality, which Pirsig states that
Lila (a living being) isn't.
dmb says:
Think of it like this; when the cohesion that holds a living being together
is broken, that is death. That is when the static patterns start to break
down into their constituent parts and you become worm food.
Paul said:
Where does 'the ability to respond to DQ' come from?
Pirsig clearly states that Static patterns of Quality
don't have that ability 'by themselves'.
dmb says:
Where does it come from? Where does the universe and life come from? Hell, I
don't know. Who does? I think the MOQ is based on what we observe about the
world. The ability of static forms to respond is demonstrated in
evolutionary movements among life forms, within social structures and in our
intellectual descriptions. We can see it operate in the world on many levels
even if the origins of it all are a mystery.
Paul said:
I'm not trying to find holes in the MoQ, I just don't
see where 'living beings' (if no more than static
patterns of Quality) get the ability to respond to DQ
from (within the MoQ framework) when it is made clear
that SPOQ don't have that ability. Are they a special
category of static patterns? Do some SPOQ have the
ability to respond, contrary to Pirsig? It seems that
you have to add your own solution, for an interesting
example, see Wim's response to this post.
dmb says:
I disagree with Wim and am deeply saddened by this suggestion. If the MOQ is
properly understood no additional solutions are needed. Its a case of
carpeting the world rather than simply putting on a pair of warm slippers.
I'm almost, but not quite, angry about that kind of approach. As the result
of it, I think the answers you recieved from Wim and others were misleading
and confusing, if not flatly incorrect.
Let me close by saying WELCOME and by saying the obvious; some people
understand the MOQ better than do others, so be skeptical of what's posted
here.
Thanks for your time,
DMB
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 26 2003 - 20:00:25 BST