[MD] Betternes - 4 levels of!

[Horse]

  Hi Mark

As far as I can see the 4 statements I presented are pretty much a 
summary of static/stable patterns in relation to DQ and sums up much of 
what Pirsig wrote in Lila.

At the Inorganic level (Order is better than Chaos) if there were no 
order there would be no elements or molecules and thus no planets, stars 
galaxies etc. - an infinity of chaos/energy.
The Organic/Biological level (Alive is better than Dead) builds on the 
Inorganic level through complex molecules through which life emerges, 
survives and sustains itself.
The Social level (Together is better than Alone) builds on the 
Organic/Biological level to create groups/families/societies etc. which 
further enhance the prospect of merely surviving.
And at the Intellectual level (Reason is better than Dogma) we have 
reason to allow us to think about what we are taught to unthinkingly 
repeat by institutions at the social level.

In the above, I think, we can see where Dynamic Quality relates to 
Static Patterns of Value in that each level - as Pirsig described - 
emerges from the previous level. It also become, to me at least, easy to 
see where there is a moral preference - i.e. betterness.
But if you think, as you appear to do, that the above is just dogma then 
try reversing the statements and see what falls out:

Would you rather have chaos/disorder than order and consequently nothing 
but random energy?
Would you rather be dead then alive?
Would you rather be alone and isolated then have company?
Would you rather repeat others nonsense and orthodoxy or would you 
rather think for yourself?
Would you rather change to stagnation or the new to the old?

It all comes down to what is preferable.

It would seem that where Pirsig has created something so simple to 
understand, there are others who would try to complicate it to the point 
where what initially makes sense becomes incomprehensible.

How do we know alive is better than dead? Easy. Top yourself and find 
out! Let me know how that one goes!
My interpretation of Dogma? Endlessly repeating what someone else has 
said without thinking about why it may be true, false or somewhere in 
between. If I were just repeating the above, ad nauseum and mantra 
stylee, then it would be dogma. As it is I've given it considerable 
thought and found it to have immense value.

Horse



On 01/11/2010 05:31, 118 wrote:
> [Horse]
>> I'll take a wild stab in the dark here and guess that what Ron referred to
>> was something that was about on MD several years ago.
>>
>> Inorganic - Order is better than Chaos
>> Organic - Alive is better than Dead
>> Social - Together is better than Alone
>> Intellectual - Reason is better than Dogma
> [Mark]
> Aren't you pointing out Dogma above?  If there are reasons for these
> statements, then we should discuss them.  They seem more like premises to
> me.  How do we know that alive is better than dead?  We do not know how to
> value dead except through life, this seems a little biased to me and
> certainly does not involve reason.  Perhaps you have a different
> interpretation of Dogma.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark

-- 

"Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid."
— Frank Zappa