[MD] Free Will

[Andre Broersen]

Ron to Andre:

First, if we are pragmatists, then indeed all experience rests on a static point of view and that
leads the conversation to "meaning". I argue that DQ must have meaning to be useful.

Andre:
Agreed Ron. That's why Pirsig has argued that everybody knows what quality is, even a six-year old. And if there is something you do not need to explain to a six-year-old it is a 'radical empiricist' and 'pragmatic' point of view and experience. Our-old-timers-silly philosophical deliberations take such a long time to catch up with six-year-old immediately experienced realities! As I heard the other day, the difference between a fictional story being accepted as opposed to a 'real truth story' is that the former has to logically make sense and 'hang together'. The latter doesn't.

Ron:
Second, that is exactly what I'm saying "some things are better than others" and not I'm not sure how this is a support to that statement that DQ is unconceptualized and must remain unconceptualized within the framework of the MoQ.

Andre:
There is a real danger here I believe Ron. And I think you are far more qualified than me to reflect on this because you give the impression that you know a lot more about Plato and Aristotle than I do.
I therefore quote Phaedrus:
'Plato's second synthesis is the incorporation of the Sophists 'arete' into this dichotomy of Ideas and Appearance...in this attempt to unite the Good (unconceptualised) and the True (conceptualised, static good)...Plato is nevertheless usurping arete's place with dialectically determined truth'.

This, I find, is the danger in conceptualising DQ.

As Phaedrus argues:
'Once the Good has been contained as a dialectical idea (read Ham's arguments for example) it is no trouble for another philosopher (not Ham) to come along and show by dialectical methods that arete, the Good, can be more advantageously demoted to a lower position within a 'true' order of things, more compatible with the inner workings of dialectic. Such a philosopher was not long in coming. His name was Aristotle'. (ZMM, p 374)

But if DQ remains unconceptualised is it therefore 'meaningless' as you argue?

To the contrary (I would argue). The same as Pirsig argues. We need something bigger than ourselves. Pirsig, in the AHP tapes, cites approvingly Abraham Maslow, who said:
'I've come to think of this humanist trend in psychology as a revolution in its truest and oldest sense of the word, in the sense of which Galileo, Darwin, Einstein, Freud and Marx made revolutions' [and he was pointing towards a higher level psychology]'... a fourth level psychology: trans-personal, trans-human, centred in the cosmos rather than in human needs and interests, going beyond humanness,identity, self-actualization and the like. We need something bigger than we are,to be awed by it. To commit ourselves to a new naturalistic, empirical and non-churchly sense. Perhaps as thorough as Whitman, William James and John Dewey did'.

Anticipating a possible response to the tune of: doesn't DQ then become something unattainable, something the religiously inclined would suggest requires faith to believe in? I emphatically say: NO! DQ can be experienced everyday of our lives. We are capable of apprehending it. It is up to us to go with it.
  
(Just on a personal note, my memories of my own childhood, when I was playing some game with friends: whenever some older person came along...asked us what we were doing...analyzing it, debunking it... we said that he was 'spoiling the game'... taking away the (unconceptualised) 'magic' which enthralled us. I wonder how many posters here can find similar examples of this...when they were children... .).

Ron:
Pragmatically Andre, DQ being understood as undefined betterness is more useful than insisting that it remain unconceptualized.

Andre:
Yes and no Ron. I sympathize with Pirsig when he argues that we should keep all concepts out of DQ. 'Concepts are always static. Once they get into dynamic Quality they'll overrun it and try to present it as some kind of concept itself'( Anthony's PhD, p 35).

If I have left anything out to which you wanted me to respond Ron, please let me know, I am bushed at the moment...it's  been a long day.