RE: MD Truth (rational enquiry)

From: Paul Turner (
Date: Wed Oct 22 2003 - 13:22:25 BST

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD Re: NEW PIRSIG WEBSITE"

    Hi Mark

    No matter at which point one begins exploring the MoQ, one discovers
    that the particular area of enquiry implicates all other aspects of the
    I apologise if this is a naive statement. But it occurs to me that the
    MoQ is not foundationalist? One may state that Quality is the empirical
    grounding of reality, and that may sound foundationalist. But if one
    begins to apply the MoQ, as we have done concerning truth for example,
    then all other areas align themselves in a coherent unity.
    To give an example: We discuss the intervention of DQ in rational
    enquiry. This begs the question, 'Who is enquiring?' We move from the
    epistemic utility of value to the ontological status of individuals.
    Individuals are patterns of evolutionary related levels of SQ in a
    continuum - a relationship with DQ.

    Yes, unlike the vocabulary of substance based metaphysics, the MOQ
    provides a vocabulary and a context in which to consider a massive range
    of human experience, and this may extend to placing everyday activity
    into an evolutionary context. Also, as you say, human experience cannot
    be detached completely from Dynamic indeterminacy, and any explanation
    that does so is likely to miss something of value.

    This being so, DQ can never be excluded from rational enquiry?

    I agree - Dynamic Quality, as synonymous with experience, pervades all
    static patterns. If I elaborate on the last email, my statement may be

    A study of documented rational enquiry throughout history lends itself
    to the interpretation that structures of thought are getting better at
    explaining and predicting experience. In an MOQ framework, this is
    described as the evolution of intellectual patterns. In terms of
    evolution, if we state that all activity is, in broad terms, directed
    towards greater stability [towards static patterns] or towards greater
    versatility [towards Dynamic Quality], then rational enquiry may be
    directed towards strengthening existing structures or towards new and
    better structures.

    If we further consider the characteristics of each aspect of the
    evolutionary process, a shift towards greater stability requires a
    particular spirit and method - e.g. intellectual discipline, adherence
    to logic, clarity of terms, gaining of social approval - and this indeed
    has a static quality of its own. Dynamic advances, on the other hand,
    require more of an artistic spirit to follow "dim apprehensions," a kind
    of value-looseness. It seems to me that both characteristics are needed
    to evolve intellectual patterns and as such I think rational enquiry,
    like anything else, operates in this ratchet-like manner. In short,
    whilst I consider all experience to be a continual emergence of static
    patterns from ongoing Dynamic Quality [and so it is never excluded]; I
    think it is useful to distinguish between the static and Dynamic aspects
    of evolution.

    It is in this respect that I stated "not all rational enquiry is a
    response to Dynamic Quality."



    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Oct 22 2003 - 13:26:04 BST