[MD] The Quest for Quality

[Ham Priday]

Greetings Chris, Margaret (and the rest of you) --

> The way I see it, evolution is indeed moving toward Good, or Quality.  But 
> we are not equipped to understand the full
> meaning of Quality, or perhaps not even a fraction. But we are
> trying.  I think that's what it's all about, the movement of the
> patterns. When a Quality event, or experience occurs, that is
> in essence seeing a bit more of The Good, Quality.  We move
> towards it, are embedded in it, a part of it and created of it,
> it is always there.

The way I see it, evolution is the temporal mode of man's experience. 
Everything in existence is impermanent and changing, including man himself. 
Change comes about as a result of difference, specifically the difference 
(dichotomy) between subjective awareness and the objective world we 
construct from our displaced value.  This value is neither "good" nor "bad", 
except as we experience it.  And, as value-sensible agents of existence, the 
Quest for Quality is ours.  It is we who define moral values.

As you say, we are not equipped to "understand" the full meaning of value. 
But we are superbly equipped to realize it, so that the "meaning" is 
self-evident in its perception.  All value is relative, a maxim that Pirsig 
articulated as "some things are better than others".
However, Pirsig erred in suggesting that Quality (value) is the essence of 
reality and is "always there".  Value cannot exist without a sensible 
observer, which is WHY we are here.  There is your "meaning", Chris, and the 
reason it is not fully understood is that the   MoQ's author failed to give 
his Quality a metaphysical foundation.

Margaret isn't the only one for whom the concept of a universe moving to 
betterness is problematic.

[Margaret]:
> I have a problem with the idea of 'evolution' evolving toward
> something 'better' or with greater quality even.

Even if everything is destined for betterness, where does that leave the 
individual whose lifespan on this planet is less than four generations? 
What possible purpose does Quality or value serve if its ultimate state of 
goodness is never realized?  Does the notion of "pure Quality" make any 
sense in the absence of a value-sensible agent?

Nothing comes from nothing.  No existent - not Quality or even Evolution - 
can bring itself into being.  The created world, and everything in it, is 
derived from an uncreated source.  The idea of a primary source that 
transcends existence is apostasy to Pirsig.  Having  rejected this idea, he 
cannot account for the cause of experiential reality, the appearance of a 
differentiated universe, or, indeed, why some things are better.  There is 
no meaning or teleology to the Quality hierarchy of levels and patterns. 
The MoQ is a euphemistic paradigm for objective reality in the same way that 
"being-in-the-world" is a paradigm for the philosophy of existentialism.  It 
may be quality prose that makes us feel good, but it is not a metaphysical 
cosmology.

Sorry about this delayed response to Christoffer's post of 9/12 , but I've 
been away for a week.

Regards to all,
Ham