Hettinger (hettingr@iglou.com)
Fri, 31 Jul 1998 12:33:27 +0100
I've been following this conversation sporadically, and I'll just
interject my two cents worth.
As far as I'm concerned, Pirsig's concept of having discovered a simple
way to determine the morality of actions, patterns, etc. is something
that just doesn't pan out. I'm sure it felt like a breakthrough, but
as most everyone has noticed, it simply doesn't work--at least not
simply.
I think he was on the right track, though, and I'm leaning toward this:
The important thing is not only the interaction level of an event, but
its depth of awareness.
Most events (any kind of pattern interaction) seem to happen within one
of the struggle areas (the tweens: inorganic-biological;
biological-social, etc.). However, some events (and entities) have
active membership in more than one level.
If an event involves simultaneous (linked) interaction within more than
one area, it is more moral than an event that only operates in one of
the struggle areas.
Any event that operates from its highest point and includes all lower
levels in the (e)valuative function would be more moral than one that
does not go all the way down. And in that context, (being aware all
the way down) the interaction that operates at the highest level would
be most moral.
I don't know if this is any more provable or checkable than the current
version.
Maggie.
-- 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 - 16:43:29 CEST