From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Fri Mar 19 2004 - 20:23:51 GMT
Hi Mark,
Your wrote:
> > 4 and 5. A coherent relationship to DQ. Coherent state of the static
> > repertoire. a. A coherent relationship with DQ is a description of an
> > aesthetic sense of beauty, in which static patterns of Quality maintain
> > or reach a high Quality relationship with Dynamic Quality.
>
> This I still have trouble understanding. Can it be explained in 10 words or
> less, like "Dynamic Quality is a response to beauty." ? ?
>
> Mark 18-03-04: Beauty is a coherent patterned relationship with Dynamic
> Quality. (9 words).
Great. Now I'm confused as to the meaning of 'coherent pattern' because if
you mean by 'coherent' something that is 'logical,' beauty is
inexplicable in logical terms. If you mean be 'coherent' something that is
'ordered,' then 'pattern' becomes redundant because patterns by definition
are ordered. I'm not just being nit-picky for the fun of it; I'm really
trying to grasp your concept.
Mark: 19-03-04: Sincere thanks for perseverance Platt. I hope it leads
somewhere?
My dictionary defines 'cohere' as: To be logically or aesthetically
consistent. (Variations of this bring in consistency of purpose also, but it's a long
quote.)
Here we see the terms 'logic' and 'aesthetic' appearing in the same
definition. I like this, because for me, logic IS an aesthetically coherent
intellectual pattern of value evolving in a relationship with DQ. Poincaré talks of the
beauty of maths, and maths is nothing if not logical? So, no problems there re:
the MoQ.
If the working definition of beauty becomes, a coherent patterned
relationship with Dynamic Quality, then Logic may said to be, a beautiful intellectually
patterned relationship with DQ.
> Mark 18-03-04: Well, my working definition of beauty as a coherent
> patterned relationship with Dynamic Quality was developed in The edge of
> chaos, which i believe you have read? In diagrammatic form it looks like
> this: Event stream (DQ as source - SODV) --------> Coherence (beauty)
> <-------- Evolution. (DQ as goal - Lila.) The higher the coherence the
> greater the beauty. (Mystical reality may be described as very exceptional
> coherence.)
Yes, I've read your essay and found much of it enlightening. But I'm still
hung up on things like 'event stream,' and 'coherence' which you now
equate with 'beauty.' If beauty is the same as coherence, then your 9 word
definition becomes "Beauty is a beautiful patterned relationship with DQ."
Would that be correct?
Mark: 19-03-04: The term Event Stream is explained in Subjects, Objects, Data
and values. I have no wish to change that explanation. As for my equating
Beauty with event stream, this is discussed in TEOC. Coherence is IN the event
stream, not THE event stream itself. AN analogy may be thought to be a whirlpool
in a brook or stream on a hot summers day? The whirlpool is a coherent
pattern maintaining a structure within the flow of the stream.
If we replace whirlpool with patterns of value (be they Inorganic, organic,
social or intellectual), and stream with DQ, then patterns of value may be
thought to be able to reach and maintain a coherent structure in the face of DQ -
the cutting edge of reality.
Is beauty a pattern? What is it? I felt i found an answer to these questions
when i thought about the relationship of patterns to DQ. Beauty IS the
relationship. What is the relationship? It is the coherence of the relationship. What
is coherence? Coherence is a fine balance between SQ and DQ, such that SQ
almost becomes DQ - SQ becomes 'opaque' to DQ.
It is here we find beauty, because our patterns are included in the
coherence.
> Mark 18-03-04: I have tried to address this, but note: Science does not
> prescribe value to biodiversity. However, the MoQ does indicate the value
> of diversity as ability to respond Dynamically. You conveniently bypass
> this issue. Shame! Shame! ;-)
Do you have a reference where the MOQ "indicates the value of diversity as
ability to respond to DQ?" My understanding is that today only an
individual human being can respond to DQ.
Best to you,
Platt
Mark: 19-03-04: “They all operate at the same time and in ways that are
almost independent of each other.” (Pirsig, 1991, p. 153)
'They' are static levels. The levels are composed of patterns.
'Operate' here indicates that each level is still evolving along side all the
others.
Individuals are not the only patterns that can respond to DQ. Each level
evolves even when a new level is emerging in dominance. But because the higher the
level is the faster the more accelerating is its evolution, the Intellectual
level of Humans makes the other levels look as though they are standing still
by comparison.
Thanks for a very stimulating discussion Platt, and i look foreword to more.
All the best,
Mark
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 : Fri Mar 19 2004 - 20:26:33 GMT