[MD] Intellectual Level

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Mark]
My question was more towards the perception of free will or determinism.

[Arlo]
I don't think these are the only two options. Personally, I favor the 
"structuration" theories of, for three examples, Archer, Giddens and 
Bourdieu. While they all have different takes on this, the underlying 
idea is that agency is both enabled and constrained by structure, so 
"free will" (if you prefer that term) is made possible by the very 
constraints (determinism, if you you prefer) placed upon it. They are 
not opposing concepts, but mutually active.

Within Pirsig's metaphysical hierarchy, this ties to the 
static/Dynamic in that the range of possible responses an organism 
has to its environment is not only constrained by its "level", but is 
also made possible by its "level". Indeed, I've argued in the past 
that the "levels" can be defined by the range of responses a pattern 
within that level has to its environment. On the inorganic level, 
this range of responses is narrow, especially when compared to the 
range of responses levels above it. An amoeba (biological pattern) 
has a much greater range of possible responses available to it, while 
a socialized agent has even more.

Pirsig viewed the ascending hierarchy as enabled greater freedom each 
level, and I think that's right. But this freedom arises from the 
very constraints each level is bound by.

I think one of the ways we can see "structuration" in modern times is 
to witness the near simultaneity that "inventions" seem to occur 
across the globe. Structurations would point out that as human 
knowledge expands, the probability of these innovations expanded to 
the point where they were (or would be) nearly inevitable. This never 
means, of course, they are entirely destined to occur. But the 
likelihood increases exponentially. I don't know, for example, 
exactly how many years human ancestors lived without being able to 
create fire, but imagine the likelihood of a civilizing (knowledge 
recording and transmitting) people that would exist for a million 
years without ever figuring out how to make fire. As the knowledge of 
the tribe increased over all this time, the "discovery" of how to 
produce fire would be more and more probable to the point where it 
would be unimaginable to think of such a knowledgeable people that 
remained ignorant of how to make a fire.

Anyway, Pirsig address the "choice" you are offering, and I think its 
relevant so I am going to post it.

"The problems of free will versus determinism, of the relation of 
mind to matter, of the discontinuity of matter at the sub-atomic 
level, of the apparent purposelessness of the universe and the life 
within it are all monster platypi created by the subject-object 
metaphysics. ... In the Metaphysics of Quality this dilemma doesn't 
come up. To the extent that one's behavior is controlled by static 
patterns of quality it is without choice. But to the extent that one 
follows Dynamic Quality, which is undefinable, one's behavior is free." (LILA)

I think this puts Pirsig in the structurationalist camp, and I think 
it shows there are more options, better options, that "choosing" 
between "free will" and "determinism".

[Mark]
I don't think the self needs to be as illusive as a mirror within a 
mirror.  That is just logic playing games, like Zeno.

[Arlo]
Well, if you think you can define the "pre-intellectual" by all means 
do so. I think given the responses by Pirsig, Einstein, Poincare, 
Peirce, Eco, Hofstater, Goedel and others this is ultimately a 
impossible task, and I think its a objectivist mindset that considers 
it possible. Maybe you'll come up with a better analogy than they 
did, but I think this is really trying to use the eye to see itself, 
or as I've said trying to use a mirror to capture its own reflection.

[Mark]
Typically we can only focus on one or two things at a time.  However, 
there is much rearrangement going on in the background.

[Arlo]
I'm not sure Pirsig would consider the sub- or un-conscious 
manipulations of symbols to be "pre-intellectual". We have habituated 
abilities to manipulate symbols even when our immediate conscious 
focus is on something else. But the pre-intellectual awareness precedes this.