Dave Thomas (dlt44@ipa.net)
Sat, 13 Dec 1997 03:45:36 +0100
Doug
A comment about this one.
> Does Quality inhere in objects?
>
> -- SOM view: Yes! All objects are defined by their inherent physical
> properties.
> -- MoQ view: No! All patterns of value are in Quality. Patterns of
> value are defined in Quality by their interrelationship properties with
> other patterns of value.
Not sure about this one, I think this is a large stumbling block for many
people, I know it has been for me.
On one hand, the quote Bo posted from ZZM which talks about the analogues
humans create and then call reality. MoQ is also a analogue and as such is a
description of reality not reality itself.
So in that sense no "object" has Quality because quality is a human mental
analogue of what is.
But on the other hand, Pirsig, in his SODV article, discussing Bohr's
experiments maintains that there had to be data input into the experiment and
the source of the data was Dynamic Quality. So in this case it appears that
qualities are resident in the external "object".
So at this point in time here's my take. Everything has inherent Qualities.
All of these qualities make up the el giangundo field that is everything.
There qualities that are of and discrete to any individual human and qualities
that are of and discrete to all things external to that individual. From that
point of view when we ask the question: How do we know this? We then move
into the MoQ analogues which are called Static and Dynamic Quality. In Static
Quality we don't know reality as it is "a priori", we each construct our
pattern of static values which we call reality. Everything outside that
pattern is unknown to us and is in the overall field of Quality. My latest
thinking is that this "unknown to us" Quality field is not just Dynamic
Quality but a combine of "Static Quality unknown to us" and Dynamic Quality
which is truely unknown to all. So I feel the potential exists for both static
and dynamic quality events through which the individual's static patterns of
values can change. Hopefully to a closer correlation to what actually is.
What makes MoQ superior to SOM is that:
1. It states upfront that individual and collective reality is tenative in
nature and as such is subject to change based on newer and better information.
Or it can and does evolve.
2. It defines how change is possible and occurs.
3. It has, not two, but five interrelated catagories with which to constructed
and, more importantly, evaluate reality.
4. Is establishes rules and defines a moral order for the overall system.
5. By carefully and diligently using MoQ one can create an analogue which can
more closely approximates that which truely is than by using SOM.
Some may think that this method will make everything simpler and clearer but I
feel that just the opposite is the case. Given this many components and
interrelationships to deal with at the most basic, metaphysical, level vastly
increases the complexity.
Example:This tree. In SoM we define it by its scientific characteristics ie
(size, shape,color, species, x board feet of lumber, structural properties,
cell structure etc) and there we generally stop. But in MoQ, at least when we
talk about man's static pattern:"this tree", we at minimum have to move on up
into the social level at talk about what social values does man assign to
"this tree". Which then leads to the relationship of the static pattern that
is "this tree", to the patterns of the forest and on and on and on. A more
complete understanding of "this tree" but also much more complexed.
So I would modify your rhetorical question this way:
Does Quality inhere in objects?
-- SOM view: Yes! All objects are defined by their inherent physical properties.
-- MoQ view: Yes and No! [All things have inherent values] All patterns of
value are in Quality. [Those] patterns of value [which humans assign] are
defined in Quality by their [static pattern of values and the
interrelationship those properties have with other patterns of value.]
Dave
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:26 CEST