[MD] Stasis, Delcination or Improvement of Quality

[Ham Priday]

Greetings, Bruce and All --

I hope you will give some consideration to the voice of a renegade here, 
because this approach to Quality is a step in the wrong direction.  I say 
this not only because the basic premise is flawed, as I will attempt to 
show, but because it is clear to me that what Bruce is proposing would not 
have Mr. Pirsig's endorsement.

The MoQ postulated by Pirsig is based on Quality as the fundamental Reality. 
Any "subset" of Quality is either a "dynamic" level or a "static" pattern. 
The levels evolve to a "better" (i.e., higher moral) state, whereas the 
patterns remain fixed over time.  This paradigm is theorized to encompass 
all aspects and processes of the universe, at least insofar as they are 
experienced.

Bruce's brainstorm is to make "static" apply to three Quality "states" which 
he defines as stasis, declination, and improvement.  His idea contradicts 
the MoQ in several significant respects.

First of all, the term "static" means "lack of movement, animation, or 
progression," so it applies only to the state defined as "stasis".  Clearly 
a decline or an "improvement" in Quality is not a static state.  Moreover, 
"declination" (misspelled in the header) is not included in Pirsig's 
paradigm.  I'm not aware of any mention of Quality regressing or degrading 
to a chaotic state in the author's thesis.  Also, "improvement" is already 
accounted for as the directional "movement" of Dynamic Quality.  In short, 
Bruce's three proposed "static states" are neither new to the MoQ scheme nor 
correctly named.

That would be problematic enough for Pirsig, but in Bruce's analytical 
breakdown of this revised scheme he commits a semantic error which changes 
the whole context of his argument.  In truth, he's not really addressing 
Quality as the "subject" of this analysis but as a modifier of the 
nominative "states".  Consider the headings:

1.  Static Quality [the quality of STASIS]
2.  Dynamic Quality of IMPROVEMENT
3.  Dynamic Quality of DECLINATION

By using the three proposed states "of Quality" as the titles pf his 
proposition, Bruce has made the "state" the modus operandi instead of 
Quality itself.  For example, he says "Static Quality attempts to maintain 
the status over time;"  "[Improvement's] mission is to improve Quality over 
time;" "[Declination's] mission is to diminish or decay Quality over time." 
In all three cases it is the "force" or power of a particular state which 
effects or produces the Quality change.  I'm sure that Pirsig would point 
out that "stasis" and "movement" are inherent in Quality itself, that the 
resulting conditions or "states" are patterns of Quality.

I don't mean to be critical of Bruce's hypothesis, as it is well conceived 
and could conceivably stand on its own as another perspective of existential 
reality.  Instead of a hierarchy of Quality levels, we could reduce the 
dynamics of the universe to Stasis, Dissolution, and Consolidation.  (After 
all, Hegel is remembered for having reduced all process to Thesis, 
Antithesis, and Synthesis.)

The point of my critique is that this is Bruce Underwood's concept, not 
Robert Pirsig's Quality thesis.

Respectfully submitted,
Ham

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _


Hello Folks,

I have been wrestling with this idea for a while and thought I would throw 
it out here for comments and banter. I hope to do better about responding, 
but it is hard to find the time to respond as I would like to.

The idea here started off by thinking of what "Static" means and applying 
that to three areas: Stasis, declination and improvement. As many of you 
have seen, I think that Chaos is the state where something has declined from 
organization to an absolute state of disorganization and is thus the 
opposite of Quality. However,energy still exists, but in a disorganized 
state. Dynamic Quality will continue to affect the energy. I see things as 
energy either moving towards improved organization or moving towards chaotic 
disorder. Below is a link to an image that depicts what I have been thinking 
about. You may want to think of it as life as you view it or most any item 
that is static.

http://www.thinnerself.com/quality_of_improvement.gif

I was thinking about this and came to think of "Quality" as being in one of 
three states “Quality” states:

Static Quality:
Static Quality attempts to maintain the status over time. Static Quality’s 
position is to neither improve nor decay, but to maintain status quo. 
However, from an energy stand point, Static Quality must consume energy in 
order to maintain its position to not be consumed by Dynamic Quality of 
Chaos or Dynamic Quality of Improvement. By default then it would appear 
that Static Quality is a destructive force by nature as it consumes energy 
to remain static.

Dynamic Quality of improvement:
Its mission is to improve Quality over time by destruction and construction 
and to establish ratchet points of Quality. By nature, it consumes energy to 
move forward towards in a positive direction over time.

Dynamic Quality of declination:
It mission is to diminishes or decay Quality over time. Items move towards 
chaos and are being consumed in destruction. The only state of "true Static 
Quality" is a state of total disorganization of energy into a chaotic state.

Thanks for your thoughts and responses,

Bruce