[MD] What kind of ethical theory is the MOQ?

[MarshaV]

Greetings Steve,   

On Nov 24, 2010, at 11:57 AM, Steven Peterson wrote:

>> For me, a MoQ'er, Reality = Quality(unppatterned/patterned).  Do you want to
>> make this a discussion of an independent self that chooses?
> 
> (I was trying to talk to the one referred to above in the
> prepositional phrase "for me..."  Apparently, no such person exists,
> yet I keep getting responses from this person. Very strange.)

When 'I' use the convention label 'I' I am referring to a collection of 
ever-changing, interrelated, impermanent, inorganic, biological, social 
& intellectual static patterns of value.  The word 'I' is referring to a 
ever-changine process.   


> According to Pirsig, everything that exists is one big collection of
> value choices. The independent self that chooses in inferred from some
> such value choices. While the special ontological status of this agent
> is according to Pirsig a fiction, it is nevertheless often helpful to
> make use of the inference of an independent self as well as rocks, and
> trees, and governments. I think we all understand that. Why bring it
> up here?

Because the collection of static patterns of value are changing.  And the 
best choice made can only be determined by the patterns available within 
the event. 


> While Pirsig's point is important, there is a time and place for
> pointing out that the special ontological status traditionally granted
> to the self in philosophical discussions is arguably a fiction, there
> are also lots and lots of other times where saying so is entirely
> irrelevant to the matter at hand. Have you considered that this might
> be one of those times?

I have considered it, and believe the self as an ever-changing, collection 
of patterns can never be ignored.  Also the dynamic circumstances may 
have a major affect the event.  To constrain Quality within an absolute,  
generalized conceptual boundary seems totally anti-MoQ.  


>> The MoQ'ist process would be, considering
>> the circumstances in a specific case, to use the best static patterns available.
>> Honestly, I do not think more needs to be decided?
> 
> 
> I'm just asking what you think the best static patterns available are,
> but you don't seem interested in that game, and I'm not interested in
> the one you are playing since I am not permitted to take for granted
> for purposes of this discussion that you even exist.

Oh, I exist, but as a collection of ever-changing, interdependent, impermanent 
inorganic, biological, social & intellectual static patterns of value.  And therefore, 
the most ethical choice would always be using the best static patterns of value 
available in the event.  How could it be otherwise?   


Marsha 

 
___