[MD] Why are things called patterns?

[David Harding]

Hi Craig,

> [David]
>> These are ideas which you communicate to me...we are talking. And we can only ever talk in ideas.
>> These are ideas which you communicate to me.
> 
> This seems to be an example of the fallacy of mistaking the menu for the food.
> 1) Beef, chicken & fish are on the menu
> 2) Only words are on the menu
> 3) :. Beef, chicken & fish are words

Yes, words representing things is a *good* *idea*.

> or  
> 
> 1) Brushing your teeth is a good idea
> 2) An idea is an intellectual pattern
> 3) :. Brushing your teeth is a (good) intellectual pattern
> 
> "The MOQ says that Quality comes first, which produces ideas, which produce what we know as matter."
> [Pirsig, Lila's Child] 
> "Playti have been laying eggs and suckling their young for million of years before there were
> zoologists" [Pirsig, Lila's Child]
> 
> How do we reconcile these two statements?

I don't see a contradiction.

> One way would be to say that in the first quote, Pirsig is talking about matter as "theoretical entities",
> such as atomic nuclei surrounded by orbiting electrons.  In the second quote, he is talking about platypi
> as biological patterns, apart from any classification that zoologists assign them.

In the first quote - Pirsig is talking about how the mind / matter debate isn't an either / or debate.   Pirsig solves the mind / matter debate by claiming that there is something more fundamental than either matter or ideas - it's quality.   Pirsig reminds us, in the first quote, that while ideas produce what we know as matter, that isn't the end of the story.  He says it is a *good* idea that matter comes first.  And because quality is fundamental and not ideas; then we should behave and live as if matter is first when it is *good* to do so. Such an instance of a *good* time to do so is when zoologists are studying Platipi. This is what Pirsig is talking about in his second statement..

-David.