Clark (clark@netsites.net)
Sun, 19 Jul 1998 06:36:01 +0100
----------
> From: Diana McPartlin <diana@asiantravel.com>
> To: Multiple recipients of <lilasqd@mail.hkg.com>
> Subject: LS Re: The name that can be named is not the eternal Name
> Date: Friday, July 17, 1998 5:06 PM
>
> Keith and squad
>
> Liked the essay and the conclusion (greatly simplified) that static
> quality is pattern and dynamic quality is not-pattern. It's a more
> refined explanation than change vs stability and avoids arguments on
> things like "constant changes" etc.
>
> But still we're missing any mention of morality and how it fits into
> this. Pirsig states quite clearly that dynamic quality is of a higher
> morality than static. And, in case nobody noticed this Pirsig quote from
> personal correspondence with Anthony, here it is again:
>
> "Every time you discover for the first time that something is better
> than something else - that is where Dynamic Quality exists. There is no
> fixed static location for it."
>
> Awaiting Keith's response
>
>
> Diana
>
>
Diana,
You have a knack for cutting through the verbiage and putting your
finger
on the nut of the problem.
You have asked the question that has been bugging me since my first
reading of Pirsig's books. I think that he had the same problem that we
have in defining morality (value, good, etc) and I think that the
difficulty lies in the fact that the definition of Morality cannot be
extended to include both the Morality of the physical universe without
regard to humanity, and Morality as perceived by humanity. Ideally these
two definitions should be the same but, as is obvious, the human view of
morality in many cases differs from the Morality of the universe and I
think this is where we get into ambiguity.
I have not re-read Lila with just this thought in mind but I am
certain that Pirsig switches back and forth between universal morality
and human morality randomly without pointing out the possible conflict
between the two.
In my view, Dynamic Quality began with the "Big Bang" and was the
result of the possibilities generated by the falling energetics if the
process. (Better, it WAS the possibilities generated by the entropy of
the first few minutes).
Certain configurations of matter and energy were locked in because of
the falling energy levels. (The needed level of energy was not available
to reverse these processes because of entropy.) This situation provided
the physical foundation that has resulted in the current structure of
the universe and it was the beginning of what I consider to be Dynamic
Quality. As time passed and the complexity of the universe increased due
to the operation of Static Quality, the range of possibilities of
Dynamic Quality also increased. SQ and DQ worked together circularly to
increase the complexity of the system. The result of this increasing
complexity eventually made an originally deterministic universe
effectively non-deterministic. Dynamic Quality was the range of
possibilities provided by the falling energetics of the universe and
Static Quality was the latches made within these possibilities which
provided an ever increasing range of possibilities for Dynamic Quality,
which further made more options available to Static Quality, and so on.
This is my idea of the physical origin of DQ and SQ.
DQ = Possibility
SQ = Realized Possibility
Morality is the operation of Quality within the available range of
possibilities. We could say that Morality is the static hang-ups that
impede the flow of entropy toward complete randomness. Morality is any
compatible Static hang-up that lengthens the life of the universe.
If we now shift forward some 14 point something billion years we
introduce humanity into the picture. It should be obvious that prior to
the last hundred years or so the view of morality taken by the human
race was solely concerned with what was immediately good for the human
race. I would venture to say that even now the vast majority of the
human race takes this view.
In this view the Morality of the physical universe is not in all, or
maybe most, cases compatible with the perceived Morality of the human
race. And, of course, the Morality of the human race raises many
questions which are of no concern to the Morality of the universe. It is
for this reason that I think that the two questions should be considered
separately. I think this is the cause of most of the ambiguity
surrounding the question of Morality. Regarding Possibility as the
bedrock source of Dynamic Quality, in my view, eliminates the ambiguity
surrounding this term. Pirsig, himself, leaves this question up in the
air and surrounded by much puzzlement.
To sum up:
Dynamic Quality is the complete (and changing) range of possibilities
presented by the physical organization of the universe.
Static Quality is that portion of this range of possibilities which
are latched and which generally tend to lengthen the life of the
physical universe.
Cool (human) Static Quality is perceived individually and is those
conditions which we (individually) perceive to be of value. The Many
Truths
idea.
Ken Clark
-- homepage - http://www.moq.org/lilasquad unsubscribe/queries - mailto:lilasquad@moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:28 CEST