[MD] Fwd: Re: Static Patterns Rock!

[David Morey]

Hi Horse

I pretty much agree with all that,  but should not DQ and SQ be a way to understand the whole of experience? Otherwise the MOQ is missing part of experience,  so I suspect the way DQ and SQ are being defined has become too rigid and inflexible. What I want to know is where we put for example flavours we experience,  oranges and bananas taste differently,  here is difference,  but the qualities of taste do not need concepts,  so we have these patterns that are not due to concepts,  seems to me the definitions of MOQ should cover these,  they are pre-conceptual patterns,  they have an identity without concepts,  do we need to recognise such differences in DQ or recognise them as pre-conceptual SQ, happy with either,  uncomfortable that they seem to be excluded from both SQ and DQ due to too rigid definition. Can we fix these definitions? Yes pre-conceptual patterns are not in the current MOQ,  but they are in experience,  underlying culture and concepts,  they are in experience,  if the MOQ ignores them does it not need fixing? For me such patterns are covered by the idea if SQ,  the error is to limit SQ to concepts,  experience is richer than this limit suggests,  MOQ should not overcome the aporias of SOM simply to create new ones. I am very happy to have unpatterned DQ and patterned SQ if the attachment of conceptual to SQ is dropped, thus looks like a bad move to me,  it solves some problems but creates the new ones I am pointing out. You may think my solution is worse than the problems it is solving,  but I think the problems should be clear to everyone,  no one has offered a better solution so far I believe. But interpretation all the way down looks suspect to me, we may bring something to the banana,  our likes and dislikes,  but the banana has something apples do not,  their own uniqueness that we experience,  their difference from all other fruit tastes. And in science to there is difference,  theory is powerful but in the end the evidence decides, what does empirical experienced evidence give us? Is it not something primary and below theory? Experiences have this capacity to be shared,  these commonalities,  these patterns are the touch points on which conceptual SQ is built. These things matter to politics:

http://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com

Regards
David M

Horse <horse at darkstar.uk.net> wrote:

>Hi DM
>
>SQ is a concept relating to patterns. It is a human metaphysical concept.
>What we're talking about, w.r.t. Pirsig's MoQ, is static patterns of 
>value and dynamic quality.
>Animals, the vast majority anyway, are biological and inorganic 
>patterns. Instinct is biological.
>The vast majority of animals don't, as far as anyone can say with any 
>certainty, have concepts.
>They can recognise shapes (another fascinating facet of the eye - edge 
>and shape detection) but do not have a concept of shape - because they 
>have no concepts!
>They use other biological values to navigate and get around in the world.
>Some animals may have social values or patterns - certain types of 
>hymenoptera and cetaceans come to mind, along with higher primates. Some 
>of the higher primates (and possibly cetaceans ) may even have concepts 
>but this can only be inferred and, so far as I'm aware, has not been 
>conclusively proven.
>
>What I don't get is why you are trying to impose an idea onto the MoQ 
>that has been shown not to be part of the MoQ.
>There are static patterns of value and dynamic quality - that's it. 
>Nothing else.
>DQ is unpatterned.
>SQ is patterned.
>There is no such thing, in Robert Pirsig's MoQ, as patterned DQ. It 
>doesn't exist.
>What you are suggesting is not Pirsig's MoQ.
>
>Horse
>
>On 12/10/2013 16:13, David Morey wrote:
>> Maybe you can help explain it then,  do animals with instinctive behaviors identify their food and mates using SQ? Yes or no.
>>
>> Is this SQ conceptual? Yes or no.
>>
>> Either SQ can be pre-conceptual,  which I prefer,  but everything pre-conceptual is DQ for DMB,  or animals use concepts,  which is a very odd use of the word concept. If you can clear up this obvious muddle I will be most grateful.
>
>-- 
>
>"Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid."
>— Frank Zappa
>
>Moq_Discuss mailing list
>Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>Archives:
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>http://moq.org/md/archives.html