[MD] Chance

[David M]

Hi Arlo

Thanks for clarification. I think saying 'chance' is not the best choice as
it may carry as much baggage as saying 'design'. I think dynamic and 
emergent
are better words for the variety and possibilities that are available so 
that
patterns can evolve and change a

> [DM]
> But is not all activity-experience value based and therefore active 
> quality
> seeking rather than simply chance for Pirsig?
>
> [Arlo]
> I was really talking about the overarching teleology and not that the 
> immediate
> activity of any individual is not value-oriented. Of course it is. My 
> point is
> that inorganic patterns did not "decide" to create biological cells. Nor 
> was
> the appearance of biological cells the result of some "divine plan" or 
> willful
> volition of an "intelligent designer".
>
> To use Pirsig's example, the first subatomic joining to create Carbon was 
> not
> planned, ordered or destined. Nor was it the willful act of inorganic 
> patterns
> to "create something better able to respond to DQ". It was a "chance" 
> merging
> from which followed a resounding "AHA!" (to use a metaphor).
>
> In short, patterns are after-the-fact remains of high quality chance 
> events.
> This is why I say that "Quality" was perfectly happy for millions of years 
> of
> dino rule. The asteroid (to use a simplistic descriptor) that wiped them 
> out
> was not "planned to make way for homo sapiens". There was no divine plan 
> to
> turn dinos into oil for the eventual creation of Man, Glorious Man.
>
>
>
>
> 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/
>