[MD] Is the MOQ static, or a static pattern?

[Tuukka Virtaperko]

Arlo,
> [Tuukka]
> Is this *recursion* an analogy of something I'm supposed to imagine or "just perceive", or does it have static form?
>
> [Arlo]
> Recursion, like 'regress' or 'addition' or 'emergence' is an intellectual pattern of value used to describe experience. Other than Dynamic Quality, everything (from inorganic through intellectual) is static quality. This statement of yours is really confusing to me, Tuukka, your use of "imagine" and "just perceive". For example, on one hand you seem to imply patterns of imagination are not static quality (they are), and on the other hand you seem to equate immediate perception (which I read here as immediate experience) with 'imagination'. Direct experience (DQ) comes before patterns of thought (sq).

Tuukka:
Due to my background with mathematics, I was checking whether this 
recursion is something that can be formally defined. If not, fine.

>
> [Tuukka]
> All static value patterns can incorporate the MOQ in their own way - even as the pages of a book or the state of the brain.
>
> [Arlo]
> Well this is simply stating that ALL patterns of value emerge from the level(s) underneath them. The human body (biological pattern) contains carbon and oxygen and nitrogen (inorganic patterns). But you don't consider you body simply a collection of inorganic patterns, do you? It is something 'more', in a way that makes it ineffectual to define higher levels by their lower levels.

Tuukka:
Yup. But the cargon, oxygen and nitrogen are the inorganic 
manifestations of the body. What I like about the MOQ is that due to the 
emergence of the levels, any static thing can be seen to manifest itself 
on any pattern, but differently.

> Arlo:
> To imply the MOQ is a collection of inorganic patterns of value, because intellectual patterns emerge from social patterns, which emerge from biological patterns, which in turn emerge from inorganic patterns, really doesn't say or explain the MOQ in any meaningful way.

Tuukka:
I know this may sound silly, but instead of trying to be useful, I was 
trying to be right - with the expectation that if I'm right often 
enough, that in itself is useful.

>
> Student: Tuukka, what is the MOQ?
> Tuukka: Its a collection of carbon, oxygen, nitrogen atoms, human cells, antibodies, hearts, lungs, brains, customs, practices, language, mathematics, science and art.
>
>
> [Tuukka]
> If you insist that the MOQ must be located in patterns, then why should it only be located in one pattern instead of all the patterns?
>
> [Arlo]
> Now you're committing another error, you're conflating "the Metaphysics of Quality" with "Quality". It is Quality that is 'located' in all the patterns (which is why they all end 'of Quality'. The MOQ is an intellectual description explaining that. Although 'location' is kinda SOM-y, I'd go with 'manifest' as you say later, something like Quality is 'manifest' or 'revealed' in all static patterns, or that all patterns are an 'expression of' or 'response to' Quality.
>
> By the way, in all my years here I have seen not one "cogent objection" to the MOQ as an intellectual pattern, but I have seen many against this idea. Your statement that as an intellectual pattern it is "general truth, independent of context" simply is more S/O confusion. I think Pirsig is fairly clear that the idea of that 'truth' is independent of context is exactly the type of SOM thinking his MOQ argues against.


Tuukka:
I don't think there's any problem here now that I realized the MOQ can 
be thought to manifest itself differently on every level. The point I 
needed to realize is that the MOQ is not an isolated product of any one 
level.

As you use LILA's MOQ with four patterns, this issue might seem 
irrelevant to you. But I'm using a MOQ that has 16 patterns, which 
emerge circularily from each other. This MOQ is my own creation, and if 
you wish to say it's not MOQ, I'm fine with that. Then it's SOQ. That's 
just a matter of naming.

The 16-pattern circular MOQ I'm using looks like this: 
http://www.moq.fi/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/circlemap.png . If you wish 
to understand my point of view, it makes little sense to say the MOQ is 
exclusively a product of the intellectual level, as any level can be 
thought to emerge from an indefinite number of prior levels, and 
therefore, the intellectual level emerges eventually from itself. Now, 
if the intellectual level can contain the MOQ and also emerge from 
itself in such a way, that it keeps containing the MOQ, MOQ must in some 
way be contained also by the 15 intermediate levels. Do you see what I mean?

In LILA's canonic MOQ of four linear levels, this issue is of little 
importance, because as the emergence simply stops to intellect, arguing 
that the MOQ also manifests on lower levels may indeed seem superfluous.

Best wishes,
Tuukka