[MD] Social level for humans only

[David Thomas]

On 8/27/10 10:25 PM, "MarshaV" <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

> Marsha before:
>       If you are comparing and contrasting Chalmers' ideas against RMP's
>       concerning consciousness, what are you using as RMP's ideas; he's
>       said very little directly?

I would ask you to go back an read the "Consciousness & the MoQ" thread but
that would do little good as always seem to happen here bit and pieces get
buried all over the place. The point I started out with is exactly the point
you end your sentence with, "what are you using as RMP's ideas; he's
said very little directly?"  Upon starting Chambers' book "The Conscious
Mind" I read the introduction and the thought occurred to me, "Hey he is
talking about some things that might apply to the MoQ. I wonder what RMP
specifically says about "consciousness." So I opened the electronic copy of
Lila that you so graciously gave me and did a word search and found (just
like you if you have) that he uses the word very little. Because DMB is in
graduate school and writing a thesis on Pirsig's work I specifically and
directly ask DMB the question, "What does Pirsig have to say about
"consciousness?" After much hemming, hawing, and shuffling of feet over a
week later in a completely different thread he replies like this:

>[ DMB in the Social Level thread]
> The MOQ says that even subatomic particles can express preferences and greater
> and greater degrees of consciousness unfold throughout the whole evolutionary
> process. In that sense, consciousness extends from the big bang to the
> formation of physics professors. Even DQ itself is a non-conceptual awareness.
> Can you think of anything about the MOQ that doesn't involve consciousness? I
> can't.

>To which Platt responded with this:
> Answering the question, "Do atoms experience?" Pirsig wrote:
> 
> "I think the answer is that inorganic objects experience events but do not
> react to them biologically socially or intellectually.  They react to these
> experiences inorganically, according to the laws of physics." (LS,30)

 You have what RMP says about "consciousness" in Lila, you have DMB's
interpretation, and you have another RMP quote that Platt dug up. So take
your pick.

Do you believe that quarks have experiences? Are they conscious of that
experience? Is that what Pirsig is saying? If so how does he know this? Is
that a good thing to believe?

Chalmers would answer no to all the above questions. But that does not mean
that he is right and Pirsig is wrong. What do you believe?  Believing in the
blue answers above falls into the exact same category as your belief or non
belief in God. This is not a matter of science, but one of belief.

Dave