[MD] The MoQ.org STRANGLES Creativity

[Heather Perella]

Hello Platt and Case,

> > [Platt]
> > > I have no idea on what basis  Case came to that
> conclusion. If
> > > anything, the whole point of MOQ is the
> supremacy of one moral level
> > > over another, summed up in the following
> sentence from Lila:
> > >
> > > "In general, given a choice of two courses to
> follow and all other
> > > things being equal, that choice which is more
> Dynamic, that is, at a
> > > higher level of evolution, is more moral."
> > >
> > > In other words, Quality shines brighter as you
> climb the moral
> > > evolutionary ladder from inorganic to biological
> to social to
> > > individual.
> > 
> > [Case]
> > You are glossing over too quickly the key point in
> the quote above: "all
> > other things being equal" That is balance. When
> all the big things are
> > in harmony smaller considerations have a chance to
> play a role. The
> > creative dynamic aspect can only appear when there
> is stasis at the
> > lower levels. 
> 
> What is moral is no "small consideration" in the
> MOQ.  The key to the 
> MOQ isn't that that "all things being equal" but
> that it's moral for a 
> doctor to kill a germ because the patient is "at a
> HIGHER LEVEL OF 
> EVOLUTION." You will find the "higher level" of
> morality referred to 
> throughout the MOQ. Unless you grasp the MOQ
> principle that the later 
> the evolutionary appearance, the more moral, and
> that there's never 
> stasis at the lower levels because they constantly
> compete for moral 
> dominance, you've missed the significance of "Lila."
> Pirsig didn't 
> write in "Inquiry into Balance and Harmony" but
> rather an "An Inquiry 
> into Morality."
> 
> Do you agree with Pirsig's claim that reality is an
> evolutionary moral 
> hierarchy plus DQ?
> 
> Platt


     I'll leave the question above for Case, but I
have a question for you Platt or maybe a statement,
we'll see.
     Platt, since an evolutionary hierarchy depends on
the structure that makes it a hierarchy, then the
whole structure, the static patterns of chaos,
inorganic, organic, social, and intellectual all must
be present in order for any one of them to be present
directionally from chaos towards intellectual.  If
each of the static patterns are not present, then it
all collapses back towards chaos being the end factor
of that kind of degeneration.  The constraint and
restraint of each of the levels building upon one
another allows for the intellect to think about
dynamic quality and notice DQ side by side with all of
the static levels, since all static patterns are of a
more original split which encompasses quality being
split into static and dynamic quality.  
     So for you Platt the question appears; do you
notice a principle at play here?  A principle that
states the intellectual level is defined by its'
capability to notice dynamic quality.  This principle
would then logically have non-chaos present for
intellect to be present, which happens when the other
levels hold their own allowing for the hierarchy to
even be present.  Therefore the allowance of each of
the levels by each of the levels culminating with
intellect noticing dynamic quality side by side with
static quality (all static patterns), all of this
happening since chaos is constrained and not ruling
the bunch.  This just enough non-chaotic presence
allowing for the levels to be present - what other
terms could you think of that are synonymous with
non-chaotic?  I would, as Case has, choose words such
as harmony and balance.  Without harmony and balance
amidst this static structure, the static structure
collapses and chaos rules.  Harmony and balance
doesn't rid chaos or inorganic or any of the levels. 
Balance between the levels is a tune of harmony even
though all the levels exist.  Without this harmony and
balance there is conflict between the levels, as we
have discussed before, Hitler had conflict between
levels within himself.
     Thus, his experience and noticing of the quality
split would have been not clear.  Hitler would not
have been able to notice intellectually dynamic
quality with clarification.  Much, if not all, for
Hitler would have been rigid, static with no dynamic
quality in his view any where seen or experienced. 
That's probably why Hitler pushed so much for change,
he probably didn't notice a world full of change. 
Hitler probably thought he had to make change in the
world, and that's exactly what he did with his blond
hair, blue eye population experiment and holocaust
motives.  He thought he could bring in the changes to
the world, that to him, did not exist, thus, he had to
introduce dynamic quality, but he didn't have to
introduce dynamic quality.  He only saw static quality
and thought he needed to bring dynamic quality, yet,
he didn't have to bring it - why?  Because dynamic
quality was already here and he just didn't have the
harmony that allows the balance of intellect to notice
quality, quality that includes dynamic quality.  
     Oh, what a static world Hitler must have viewed. 
Oh, what a burden he probably felt, thinking, that he
could bring change/dynamic quality to a world, he
thought, had none.  No wonder he was so full of
himself.  He thought he had to take the world into his
own hands and bring something into the world that he
thought the world lacked.  He must have thought he was
a superman.  Almost god-like, creating a world,
lacking the insight, to notice, that the world already
had 'something' that he thought, only he and his Nazis
concept, could bring into the world.  He was trying to
make a pure society, harmony, and order.  One does not
need to make these 'things', for they are already
here, as a clear intellect can show.  
     So, it probably is best I just disappear into the
trees.

Thanks, 
SA 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com