[MD] Able to change well.

[schoadabyool at talktalk.net]

Hello Ade,

I'm a great fan of Schopenhauer, primarily because, as Will Durant writes, "He 
saw that the ultimate good is beauty, and that the ultimate joy lies in the 
creation and cherishing of the beautiful." If there is a central theme to my 
life that would be it. Regretfully I never made enough money to fund the 
creation and collection of great beauty like the Carnegies, Rockefellers and 
Vanderbilts, but what little excess I had over daily needs has been directed 
toward that goal. One need not be a millionaire to surround himself with 
beautiful things. A child's finger painting can qualify.

As you point out, other philosophers besides Pirsig have identified a creative 
evolutionary force leading to perfection -- the concept of teleology. Perhaps 
its most prominent recent proponent was Teilhard de Chardin. Pirsig 
acknowledges teleology in "Lila" but claims his metaphysics satisfies not only 
those who believe it, but also Darwinians who don't. He wrote:

"Good! The "undefined fittest" they are defending is identical to Dynamic 
Quality. Natural selection is Dynamic Quality at work. There is no quarrel 
whatsoever between the Metaphysics of Quality and the Darwinian Theory of 
Evolution. Neither is there a quarrel between the Metaphysics of Quality and 
the "teleological" theories which insist that life has some purpose. What the 
Metaphysics of Quality has done is unite these opposed doctrines within a 
larger metaphysical structure that accommodates both of them without 
contradiction." (Lila, 11)

Perhaps you'll agree with me that joining these disparate views is unique.



@ Hello Platt,
I'm afraid i don't know anything about Teilhard de Chardin so i can't address this bit. But i shall try and look into it.


If this is unique then all credit is deserved. I think you may have put your finger on the one thing that may be unique in the moq.
But the only difference i can see between Jung's view and the moq lies with pre existing tendencies Jung acknowledged.
And if there is a bias in the moq, as i believe there is, toward perfection and harmony, then the moq has a pre existing tendency.
I'm still thinking about that one.


Jung can be thought of as a Darwin of the mind. He recognised pre existing tendencies at work, and explored the
possibility these tendencies had roots reaching into the sub atomic realm. This makes his teleology an unfolding whole.
As evolution advances the wholeness becomes a more perfect realisation.
The best life can do in the moq is balance static and the dynamic functions in increasingly more dynamic states.
That is the definition of life in the moq i think, static stability, dynamic progress.
In either case, Jung and the moq synthesise teleology with evolution. Jung did this before Pirsig, although the moq
and Jung may not be the same. They may be complimentary though?


I certainly agree with you that Pirsig's emphasis on individuation is not only 
central to his philosophy, but a necessary condition to achieve Dynamic 
Quality's highest good -- freedom. 

In any case, it's a pleasure to exchange ideas with you. Thank you.

Regards,
Platt


@ Thank you. Pleasure here also.
Ade