[MD] Able to change well.

[Magnus Berg]

Hi Ade

First, never mind Frank. He's literally not for real and has a very 
peculiar sense of humor, just ignore him if he doesn't make sense, he 
seldom does.

schoadabyool at talktalk.net wrote:
>My name is Adrian, and i should like to ask a question.
>
>
>Robert Pirsig says in Lila that static patterns are migrating toward Dynamic Quality.
>I think i've got that right.
>He also says that static patterns latch and are stable.
>
>
>My question is how can patterns be stable and yet migrate toward Dynamic Quality at the same time?
>
>
>Some patterns seem to be too latched and stable and can not change. So they are bad at being able to change.
>And yet others must be good at being able to change so they can migrate toward Dynamic Quality as Robert Pirsig says in Lila.
>
>
>How is this possible?
>
>
>Is this a new question or does Robert Pirsig give an answer somewhere?

It's not a completely new question, but I'm actually not sure it has 
been discussed here. I have thought about it though, very pragmatically 
I should add. Also, you might have noticed that many here on MD only see 
static patterns, and the levels, as some theoretical-only division of 
the world we see around us, so, for them, your question is actually not 
interesting, or even possible to ponder. They think, what happens, just 
happens, or using Krimel's words "Shit happens".

However, since you did ask the question, I'll assume you'd like a more 
direct answer, and mine goes something like:

One example is viruses. They are stable enough to be able to spread the 
same infection over more or less the whole world over a season. However, 
it's also dynamic enough to change into something else, if stopped by a 
new antibiotics.

But that didn't perhaps answer your question: *How* is it possible?

Then I have another example for you. It's been discussed here a few 
months ago if you want to search for the thread. It's about what happens 
when the inorganic level have reached the end of its possibilities.

As you know, the inorganic level is about physics and chemistry. I've 
even suggested to make chemistry into a level of its own, but that's not 
important here. Anyway, on the young earth, there was nothing what we 
now call life, just a big ocean in which chemistry did its deed. 
Chemistry is pretty static, because what it can do is very statically 
decided by the laws of chemistry. For example, if an O atom meets a pair 
of bonded H atoms (H2), then it immediately unbonds the H2 molecule and 
bind both H to the O atom, making water (H2O). The H atoms snaps into 
place on the top of the O forming a Mickey Mouse molecule. The laws of 
chemistry can do lots of other things, especially with the C atom with 
which it can build long chains containing both carbon, hydrogen, oxygen 
and other atoms. And every time a chemical experience/event happen, the 
result is dictated by the laws of chemistry and the atoms involved snaps 
into their predetermined place. Sometimes, when two of these large 
molecules meet, they can combine chemically into an even larger molecule 
and snaps into another shape, or the don't attract eachother chemically 
in which case they simply bounce apart again.

However, sometimes when such large molecules meet, they happen to fit 
into eachother's shape like hand and glove and if they're really lucky, 
they even meet in the right direction so the hand fits in the glove. If 
that happens, two large molecules have bonded without the help of the 
laws of chemistry. The bond is much weaker than a chemical bond, but 
just because it *is* weaker, it's also more dynamic. It can let go of 
that bond if it "wants" to. I'd even say this is the precursor to what 
we today call "free will".

Some of these fitting molecules found another molecule that also fit, 
and some even became so large and complex it could build stuff using 
other molecules in its vicinity. One day, it was able to build a copy of 
itself, and the rest is, as we say, history. The history of life to be 
specific.

I claim that these shape fitting molecules are using biological value, 
i.e. it's the basis of the biological level and is the first step out of 
the static inorganic level into a completely new level. The process also 
gives a very good insight into what constitutes a new level, why they 
are discrete and how the level dependency really work, and not just a 
theoretical buzzword.

And to connect this with Pirsig, he has said that taste and smell are 
clear cut biological value/experiences. And this shape fitting process 
is exactly how smell works. So, for me, the case is pretty closed.

	Magnus