[MD] Metaphysics

[Steven Peterson]

Hi Andre,

> Steve said:
> Since you equate the MOQ with reality, fitting all of reality into the
> intellectual level is a problem for you. But accpording to the MOQ,
> the MOQ is not reality. Quality is reality. The Metaphysics of Quality
> is words about reality (Quality) rather than reality (Quality) itself.
>
> Andre:
> I am not clear about something here. In an earlier post I said that
> the MoQ is the only (as far as I can ascertain) statement about
> reality which reflects the 'is' as opposed to the 'ought'.

Steve:
I didn't agree or disgree but I don't know what it means.

Andre:
> Now, I fail to recognise  (having read your reactions to Bodvar's
> post) that language, as a social PoV is somehow different from Reality
> (recognised by Pirsig as DQ/SQ). Isn't language part of the totality
> of DQ/SQ?


Steve:
Language is obviously part of reality.

Andre:
> How the heck is Dynamic change possible at all the levels (the lower
> two regarding our understanding of them) if, as some of you appear to
> imply, language is something different from this DQ/SQ?
>
> Is language NOT an interactive part of DQ/SQ?
> (How did the brujo effect change in the Zuni culture,,,by peeping
> through windows only???)

Steve:
New language patterns can dynamically evolve and old ones can be
undermined by new ones.


Andre:
> It seems to me that SOM prevails when language is considered only as
> an expression ABOUT reality ( i.e a subjective expression about an
> objective ...other reality ...out there) and does not ( as I
> understand Pirsig) function as an active participant PoV  IN the DQ/SQ
> process.

Steve:
Language is not generally to be taken as a representation of reality,
though it sometimes is used in that way. In general, the MOQ view of
language is that of  having evolved as a tool like any other tool for
coping with reality. The grunts and growls that were the rudiments of
language were originally a way of using reality to satisy desires.
Modern language is no different. The intellectual use of language to
create representations of reality is only one part of intellect and
not the orgin of intellect let alone the origin of language.

>From Lila:
"The intellect's evolutionary purpose has never been to discover an
ultimate meaning of the universe.  That is a relatively recent fad.
Its historical purpose has been to help a society find food, detect
danger, and defeat enemies.  It can do this well or poorly, depending
on the concepts it invents for this purpose."

So as you should see, the origin of intellect is not subject-object
metaphysics as Bo argues since intellect predates metaphysics and
philosophy in general and all atempts to "discover an ultimate meaning
of the universe."

Best,
Steve

For more of the context see the following from Lila:
"The Metaphysics of Quality resolves the relationship between intellect and
society, subject and object, mind and matter, by embedding all of them in a
larger system of understanding.  Objects are inorganic and biological
values; subjects are social and intellectual values.  They are not two
mysterious universes that go floating around in some subject-object dream
that allows them no real contact with one another. They have a
matter-of-fact evolutionary relationship.  That evolutionary relationship
is also a moral one.

Within this evolutionary relationship it is possible to see that intellect
has functions that predate science and philosophy.  The intellect's
evolutionary purpose has never been to discover an ultimate meaning of the
universe.  That is a relatively recent fad.  Its historical purpose has
been to help a society find food, detect danger, and defeat enemies.  It
can do this well or poorly, depending on the concepts it invents for this
purpose.

The cells Dynamically invented animals to preserve and improve their
situation.  The animals Dynamically invented societies, and societies
Dynamically invented intellectual knowledge for the same reasons.
Therefore, to the question, "What is the purpose of all this intellectual
knowledge?"  the Metaphysics of Quality answers, "The fundamental purpose
of knowledge is to Dynamically improve and preserve society."  Knowledge
has grown away from this historic purpose and become an end in itself just
as society has grown away from its original purpose of preserving physical
human beings and  become an end in itself, and this growing away from
original purposes toward greater Quality is a moral growth.  But those
original purposes are still there.  And when things get lost and go adrift
it is useful to remember that point of departure."