[MD] in defence of the "relative"

[markhsmit]

Hi Joe,
There is an alternative to a creator.  That is that everything has
always existed.  Our notion of birth comes from our own.  This has
indeed been used to postulate a big bang as the beginning.  It is
quite possible that the universe is static.  That is it has always existed.
No creation needed.  However, there is continual flux. Rise and decline,
appearance disappearance.  Evolution as a metaphor is flawed because
it assumes a pressure forcing evolution.  If Quality is evolving, what is the
pressure causing the evolution?  I think Pirsig confuses evolution with 
growth.

Just MHO,
Mark

On Nov 28, 2009, at 3:39:13 PM, "Joseph Maurer" <jhmau at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
From:   "Joseph Maurer" <jhmau at sbcglobal.net>
Subject:    Re: [MD] in defence of the "relative"
Date:   November 28, 2009 3:39:13 PM PST
To: "moq_discuss at moqtalk.org" <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>

On 11/27/09 5:35 PM, "John Carl" <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:

Pirsig subtitles Lila with ³An Inquiry into Morals². My take on that
> subtitle is that he expects a discussion to follow evolution as a
> foundation
> for morality.

This is exactly backwards and a significant error, in my view (and
Pirsig's).

Morality is the foundation for evolution, not the other way around. In fact
evolution doesn't make sense without some sort of "betterness" to evolve
into. The idea that morality is defined by a static hierarchical
formulation of any kind is ludicrous as well as antithetical to the very
heart of the MoQ - its an attempt to capture and define Q.

Shame!

Hi John and all,

I acknowledge Aquinas¹ perception that what he wrote was as straw, to use
his own words. Imho it is impossible to acknowledge a metaphysics for
evolution that embraces a hierarchy in essence, without a creator. In which
case the creator creates evolution instead of chance. Of course, that
solves everything, since I am totally in tune with the actions of a creator!

Evolution in existence is a different story from the evolution of
hierarchies in created essence. There can be levels in the evolution of
existence, and existence is more fluid and creative than essence. A
morality can be created in the awareness of existence ³How am I doing? Did
I get it right?². There is no creation of morality in essence only good
and bad! And so we have words: ³I was created a pig! I was created a
prince²

The grain of silicon on the beach exists differently when incorporated into
the body of an organic being while still being silicon. Levels in existence
are static boundaries for order in a hierarchical formulation of the
evolution of existence. I can strive to become more, a better person, I am
not a fixed essence at birth!

Why hasn¹t life evolved on all planets capable of supporting life?
Metaphysics is fun! Who needs all the answers? Levels in existence evolve!
Betterness comes from movement not necessarily obedience to a static order!
By obedience I become static not moral.

Levels in essence are created! The uncreated is amoral! And, of course, I
am uncreated, I am born! I don¹t have finished levels in me only genes. I
live and create with what I have.

Shame!

Joe

> Pirsig subtitles Lila with ³An Inquiry into Morals². My take on that
>> subtitle is that he expects a discussion to follow evolution as a
>> foundation
>> for morality.


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/