[MD] Static latching & faith

[Ant McWatt]

Kevin Perez stated April 15th:

The process by which unintelligible experiences become meaningful ones is 
what James Fowler calls faith.

     “Faith is not always religious in its content or context.  To ask these
     questions seriously of oneself or others does not necessarily mean to
     elicit answers about religious commitment or belief.  Faith is a 
person’s or
     group’s way of moving into the force field of life.  It is our way of 
finding
     coherence in and giving meaning to the multiple forces and relations 
that
     make up our lives.  Faith is a person’s way of seeing him - or herself 
in
     relation to others against the background of shared meaning and 
purpose.”
     (Stages of Faith: The Psychology of Human Development, HarperCollins)

Does the Metaphysics of Quality recognize this process?  Does it have a name 
for it?

----------------------------

Kevin,

The process of “finding [static] coherence in and giving meaning to the 
[Dynamic] multiple forces and relations that make up our lives” is perceived 
as a form of intellectual “static latching” in the MOQ.  As noted at the end 
of Chapter 11 of LILA:

“A Dynamic advance is meaningless unless it can find some static pattern 
with which to protect itself from degeneration back to the conditions that 
existed before the advance was made.  Evolution can't be a continuous 
forward movement.  It must be a process of ratchet-like steps in which there 
is a Dynamic movement forward up some new incline and then, if the result 
looks successful, a static latching-on of the gain that has been made; then 
another Dynamic advance, then another static latch…”

“[The] division of all biological evolutionary patterns into a Dynamic 
function and a static function continues on up through higher levels of 
evolution.  The formation of semi-permeable cell walls to let food in and 
keep poisons out is a static latch.  So are bones, shells, hide, fur, 
burrows, clothes, houses, villages, castles, rituals, symbols, laws and 
libraries.  All of these prevent evolutionary degeneration.  On the other 
hand, the shift in cell reproduction from mitosis to meiosis to permit 
sexual choice and allow huge DNA diversification is a Dynamic advance.  So 
is the collective organization of cells into metazoan societies called 
plants and animals.  So are sexual choice, symbiosis, death and 
regeneration, communality, communication, speculative thought, curiosity and 
art.  Most of these, when viewed in a substance-centered evolutionary way 
are thought of as mere incidental properties of the molecular machine.  But 
in a value-centered explanation of evolution they are close to the Dynamic 
process itself, pulling the pattern of life forward to greater levels of 
versatility and freedom.”

I think “static latching” is a better term to use than “faith” in this 
context because the latter term is being stretched by James Fowler to a 
point where it ends up meaning nearly anything.  As Pirsig notes using the 
example of the term “social”:

“There has been a tendency to extend the meaning of ‘social’ down into the 
biological with the assertion that, for example, ants are social, but I have 
argued that this extends the meaning to a point where it is useless for 
classification.  I said that even atoms can be called societies of electrons 
and protons.  And since everything is thus social, why even have the word?”  
(Pirsig, 2003c, “A Critical Analysis of the MOQ” by Anthony McWatt, p.100)

As you should already be aware, in the MOQ, the term faith is also one that 
tends to be avoided because of its supernatural connotations (as illustrated 
in paragraphs 153-159 of the “Catechism of the Catholic Church” – see below) 
and the MOQ’s East Asian “see for yourself” heritage which rejects following 
some static authority’s ideas on what “God”/Dynamic Quality wants or thinks.

Best wishes,

Anthony


“The movement towards the literalization of knowledge is a movement towards 
‘no effort’.  Traversing the mountain, as Pirsig said, is not an easy path. 
But one which
should be encouraged. Literalization does the reverse, it encourages not 
only
passivity in knowledge, but also the reliance on authority to construct 
belief.
Why ponder the Great Questions when the Church or the Party is there to 
provide
you with ready-made, soundbite answers, which, of course, serve always to 
reify
their own power.”  (Arlo Bensinger to MOQ Discuss, April 17th 2006)

“Faith is a gift of God, a supernatural virtue infused by him” (“Catechism 
of the Catholic Church”, as endorsed by Pope John Paul II in 1992, paragraph 
153)

“What moves us to believe [in God] is not the fact that revealed truths 
appear as true and intelligible in the light of our natural reason: we 
believe ‘because the authority of God himself who reveals them’.”  
(“Catechism of the Catholic Church”, paragraph 156)

“The MOQ does not rest on faith.  In the MOQ faith is very low quality 
stuff, a willingness to believe falsehoods.”  (Pirsig's Copleston 
Annotations, 2000, p.228)

“Faith is not required for an understanding of Quality. Here Quality 
succeeds where Bradley’s Absolute and Hegel’s Being and the Buddhist 
Nothingness and the Hindu Oneness and the theists’ God and Allah and 
you-name-it; all of them fail.  For Quality, no faith is required because 
there is no way you can disbelieve that there is such a thing as Quality.  
You cannot conceive of or live in a world in which nothing is better than 
anything else.” (Pirsig's Copleston Annotations, 2000, p.216)

“I think it is extremely important to emphasize that the MOQ is pure 
empiricism.   There is nothing supernatural in it.”  (Pirsig, 2000e in “A 
Critical Analysis of the MOQ” by Anthony McWatt, p.50)

“The idea that God can hear one’s prayers can be meaningful only if one 
assumes that God is a social and intellectual entity.  The Buddhist 
‘nothingness’ does not listen to prayers.  It has no discernible social or 
intellectual existence.  Dynamic Quality also does not listen to prayers.  
It also has no discernible social or intellectual existence.”  (Pirsig, 
2000a in “A Critical Analysis of the MOQ” by Anthony McWatt, p.81)

“Quality can be equated with God, but I don’t like to do so. ‘God’, to most 
people, is a set of static intellectual and social patterns.  Only true 
religious mystics can correctly equate God with Dynamic Quality.  In the 
West, particularly around universities, these people are quite rare. The 
others who go around saying ‘God wants this,’ or ‘God will answer your 
prayers,’ are, according to the Metaphysics of Quality engaging in a minor 
form of evil - Such statements are a lower form of evolution, intellectual 
patterns, attempting to contain a higher one.”  (Pirsig, 1994 in “A Critical 
Analysis of the MOQ” by Anthony McWatt, p.81)


.

_________________________________________________________________
Are you using the latest version of MSN Messenger? Download MSN Messenger 
7.5 today! http://join.msn.com/messenger/overview