From: sqsqcoherence@netscape.net
Date: Sat Mar 05 2005 - 14:55:26 GMT
Hi all.
In response to David. B and Wim.
I gather from your postings, that there may be some difference in the
interpretation of the possible existence of some sort of heirarchical values in the MoQ.
I think that when you factor in the interaction of dynamic and static
quality/values (a.k.a. coherence) for every different event that occurs in
life, there can be higher values placed on different values (of course).
An analogy of what i mean to say:
When it comes to cooking, having a knowledge of culinary techniques,
traditions, and a general instinct about it, the food you make is generally of higher quality, in relation to going completely into the unkown.
Dont get me wrong though, sometimes you have to go into the unkown to get
the best result. I mean to say that it is always different whether DQ or
SQ could/would be considered to be of greater or lesser value than the
other.
Mark 5-03-05: Hi Matt, Many of Plato's dialogues describe Socratic interogation of people who, it is claimed to show, cannot give an account of why they are good at what they do. Perhaps there were people Socratese could have interrogated who could give an account of why some people are good at what they do? Perhaps not?
In absence of any account, knowledge is made a prerequisite for being good at anything. But not everything requires intellectual patterns for excellence.
Thus skills and many arts are religated to to a subordinate level to knowledge or theory. Your example of cooking reminded me of all this - cooking, as far as Socratese is concerned, is pandering to the senses; cooks do not know what they are doing - they cannot give an account of it.
The MoQ syas that everthing is value, and knowledge is included in the term everything! - only DQ is left outside. This is a result of the Copernican inversion which places value at the centre of the MoQ. There are implication for skills:
Knowledge is now a skill - an inversion of the Socratic position. Knowledge may be used - it may engage in a process, otherwise static databases would be the be aim of all enquiery. And this is what you are telling us:
whether its for cooking, making love, science, art, mechanics, thinking, or
living. The coherent point is always changing the amounts of DQ and SQ in
each and every passing moment, and fuse so fluently as to never(maybe????) be fully distinguished.
Mark 5-03-05: One's intellectual and social traditions are part of the creative process, but DQ is outside all of this, and is the motivation and aim of the creative process itself. For those who use biological patterns in their creativity, touch or feel, is also included. Diplomats must have a supreme feel for the social implications for emotional states - in the case of brinkmanship, this is raised to an art - a potentially dangerous art to be sure.
Now we are hitting the area of Sam's Topic. Sam's starting point is conditioned with problems he becomes bogged down with. An alternative approach is to shift the starting point altogether; we may choose to begin elsewhere and ask:
What are the roles of feel and emotion in creative activity?
Is excellence best served by high emotional states?
An MoQ account has been suggested for positioning emotion on a continuum of value levels: 'Emotions are sophisticated patterns of biological values conditioned by social and intellectual patterns of values.'
Emotions here are firmly biological, although they develop in relationhsips with social, and in many cases, intellectual patterns.
While thinking about this this afternoon i was struck by a description to a problem which had been puzzeling me for some time: why can an artist be calm and yet an audience be in rapture, or an artist be calm when producing a work which later induces audience excitment?
If one views this from the point of view of the audience, the source of 'their' rapture or excitement is 'their' patterned relationship with DQ. From the point of view of the artist, his/her calm creativity is a patterned relationship with DQ.
DQ is common in both relationships, but one is calm while the other may not be.
I'm reminded of Plato's dialogue ION, in which the enthusiasm of the artist is described as the first link in a magnetic chain of rings. I am also reminded of Pirsig when he describes quality work being seen by others and there being a 'fanning out' into the community. I am also reminded of a seed crystal, which is a first link in an electrochemical reaction which fans out into a rigid static structure.
Now it seems to me that a causal chain is a poor description of this process. A better description may be to think of these relationships as part to whole relationships - non-linear fractal relationships?
Emotion is the lowest part in a continuum of part to whole crystalisation in excellent relationships, and this explains why excellent relationships 'feel' so 'emotionaly' good to an audience.
Research into how the brain actually functions indicates a part to whole relationship also - brain states are not located in one place, but emerge from complex relationships.
Excellent relationships are very highly coherent, and thus, calm. This is the point of view of the artist.
Mark
__________________________________________________________________
Switch to Netscape Internet Service.
As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer
Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.
Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_focus/
MF Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/mf/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 05 2005 - 22:17:12 GMT