[MD] Heads or tails?

[David M]

Hi Case

I agree with everything you ay below until you get to teleology.
I see no clearknockdown argument against some kind of
weak version of teleology that says that in any situation there
are a number of possible outcomes and any active system
can make choices about which outcome it will act to bring about,
and exactly where we draw a line about what sort of systems
can do this is unclear, maybe atoms make choices when they capture
electrons even.

Otherwise, great post.

David M


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Case" <Case at iSpots.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Heads or tails?


> [Kevin]
> But you do recognize the reality of others (lower case o)?  Which is to 
> say
> you and me and others enjoy individual lives.  From this perspective, what
> is Quality (capital Q)?  Is Quality (capital Q) the same as quality (lower
> case q)?
>
> [Case]
> My view of Quality is a bit different than some. I regard Quality as The
> Way. It exists in the moment of sensation; when we instantly begin the
> process of classifying sensation into perception. It is a "Blink" moment
> when we apprehend something as good or bad. It can only be experienced. It
> can not be defined because each experience is different. When you try to
> define it you quickly degenerate into legalism.
>
> Jesus put it this way: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! 
> for
> ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier
> matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have 
> done,
> and not to leave the other undone. Ye blind guides, which strain at a 
> gnat,
> and swallow a camel."
>
> Lao Tsu said this: "Thus it was that when the Tao was lost, its attributes
> appeared; when its attributes were lost, benevolence appeared; when
> benevolence was lost, the proprieties appeared.
>
> I see this as a kind of Humian argument that trouble comes when we begin 
> to
> rely so heavily on our classifications of past experience that we miss 
> what
> is fresh in the present. When you define Quality you think you know it 
> when
> you see it but you stop looking for what is new and unique in its present
> manifestation. In other words we focus more on our perceptions and 
> memories
> that on immediate sensation. We are too busy classifying each moment into
> the categories we have already created to notice that the moment may be
> showing us a whole new category.
>
>
> [Kevin]
> Right.  Subjective imaginings or objective manifestations.  By the way,
> who are "they?"
>
> [Case]
> There are phenomenologist and Buddhists and solipsists in our midst who 
> deny
> the existence of external reality.
>
> [Kevin]
> Right.  And so our subjective imaginings and objective reality matter.
> But more importantly, what or how do they matter?  Is the measure of their
> importance or worth or quality itself something subjective or objective?
> Condemnation and judgement is the dark side of subject/object metaphysics,
> imo.
>
> [Case]
> This is just my personal take on it but for me perception and memory are
> whole subjective matters. They are the product of my experience with 
> Other.
> Other does not always conform to my expectations and this forces me to
> revise my inner models a lot. Objectivity comes about when I communication
> with others and we share our experiences. When we can agree upon the
> commonality of our mutual experiences that is objectivity. Thus 
> objectivity
> is inter-subjectivity.
>
> What the MoQ adds is that change (DQ) and stasis (SQ) are fundamental to
> both the process of individual perception and to the formation of
> inter-subjective agreement. Pirsig for example does not say that SOM is 
> not
> there, only that it is not fundamental. Both are shaped by the 
> interactions
> of DQ and SQ.
>
> [Kevin]
> Speculative metaphysics?  Is there any other kind?
>
> [Case]
> I don't find Taoism to be speculative and to the extent that the MoQ is in
> line with it I don't find it speculative either. That each individual is
> alone in a world of their own sensation and perception seems to me to be a
> matter of concrete fact. That the shadows on our customized cave walls
> wiggle and hold still is not speculative in my cave. Even in the ideal 
> world
> of mathematics, Greek geometry dealt exclusively with shape and form and
> extension. These are static properties. Newton gave us laws of motion 
> which
> help us define the dynamic properties or relationships changing over time.
> More recent advances in math and science teach us that "laws" are
> expressions of probability. Even deterministic, purely causal, laws can
> produce unpredictable results.
>
> For a metaphysics to rise to the level of common understanding it can not 
> be
> airy and refined. It needs to speak to the common experience of most 
> people.
> I think most people intuitively know that the world abounds with
> uncertainty. Our language is rich with metaphors describing this. Our
> societies are constructed to maximize order and reduce the impact of
> unpredictable change. The MoQ offers at least the vocabulary and 
> principles
> to construct what Pirsig said would be "a metaphysics of randomness."
>
> It is disappointing to me that instead of taking this seriously he reached
> for teleology as a kind of Alka-Seltzer for the soul. In other words 
> rather
> the face up to the uncertainty implied in an undefined path, he chose to
> call it Quality and treat it as a kind of Omega Point which comes from
> Teilhard de Chardin and is much abused by Wilber. To me this is a 
> regression
> to the Aristotelian notion of purpose or final cause. This bit of 
> absurdity
> should have been abandoned in the 1600's with Bacon and the advent of
> natural philosophy but as we can see some habits of thought die hard.
>
>
>
>
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>