[MD] The Individual Level

[Platt Holden]

Hi Steve,

> Can you give any textual support for thinking of the levels as
> containing other levels—not of an individual as being composed of
> patterns of all levels, but the levels containing other levels?

"Mind is contained in static inorganic patterns. Matter is contained in 
static intellectual patterns. Both mind and matter are completely 
separate evolutionary levels of static patterns of value, and as such 
are capable of each containing the other without contradiction." 
 
> Platt:
> Sounds to me like a chicken or egg question. I say you can't have 
> intellectual patterns without human beings (individuals) to create them.
 
> Steve:
> It’s a bit like the chicken and the egg, and that’s a good point.
> But in this case I think we can figure out where Pirsig’s metaphysics
> starts. Does it start with the individual or does it start with the
> collections of patterns of value from which we create an analogue of
> this individual? Well it starts with Quality, but what comes next,
> patterns of values or individuals.
> 
> This question seems to be at the root of our disagreement. Would you
> agree?

Patterns and individuals are both analogues of experience. So I don't 
see the difference you see at the start of Pirsig's metaphysics. 

> Steve:
> I’m find with applying the MOQ to understand types of people. I think
> it is a mistake to define the levels as types of people. After all, the
> four levels plus DQ are said to leave nothing out.

The four levels plus ability to respond to DQ is how Pirsig describes 
the human individual. In the individual nothing is left out. 

> Platt:
> Terror, violence and gang death are actions of individuals and thus 
> people acting on the biological level. 
 
> Steve:
> So this individual is on the biological level? I had assumed that
> individuals were on the individual level in Platt’s MOQ. Now I am
> really confused.

Individuals can act biologically (criminals), socially (mind-numbed 
robots) or intellectually (free-thinking rationalists). The 
intellectual level is dominated by the latter. 

> Steve:
> I hope we are coming to a better understanding of one another’s
> interpretations.

I hope so, too.

Regards,
Platt

P.S. Incidentally I think those funny marks in your post come from 
copying a Word doc to your mail program without first converting or 
saving it to a txt file. But I could be wrong.