Metaphysics of Quality
aka,
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
Part 1, Starting from scratch.
A. Metaphysics and Metaphysical.
Metaphysics. Branch of philosophy that tries to explain reality and knowledge; the philosophical study of the real nature of the universe.
Metaphysical. 1) Of metaphysics; about the real nature of things. 2) highly abstract; hard to understand. [Ooooo, #2 is sure true. :)]
B. Quality.
6) fineness; merit; excellence. [One of the less frequent meanings from my dictionary, the more frequent meanings were: something special about a thing; characteristic, attribute; character, relative position. But my dictionary is 30 years old, the one the high school used and I bought in 1967.]
C. Metaphysics of Quality.
The philosophical explaination of reality and knowledge as related to the study of the real nature of fineness, merit and excellence. [Literal meaning.]
D. Zen.
Japanese derivation from Chinese Ch'an, (a Chinese sect of Buddhism). "... means immediate insight into the nature of reality, or life. All Zen sects revere the historic sage of the Sakyas (Buddha), believe that instruction from a Zen master may awaken in a disciple the Buddha mind that everyone possesses originally, and believe in expressing religious realization in daily work." [Ency. Brit, 1978: Japanese Philosophy topic, Kamakura and Muromachi Periods section, Buddhist Philosophy sub-section.]
"... the contemplative and mystical doctrines of Zen, (along with others), found truth in immediate experience and spiritual peace and enlightenment through meditation." [Ency. Brit, 1978: Japanese Religion topic, Characteristics and Features section, Buddhism in Japan sub-section.]
E. From R Pirsiq's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.
1) Preface paragraph: "The study of the art of motorcycle maintenance is really a miniture study of the art of rationality itself. Working on a motorcyle, working well, caring, is to become part of a process, to achieve an inner peace of mind. The motorcycle is primarily a mental phenomenon."
[I note that he states *art of rationality* as opposed to the *art of quality* which he parallels with Zen motorcycle experience in his book. Perhaps he means *the art of rationality in achieving quality* which is not quite the same as *metaphysics of quality*. Or it's just a minor point in difference that I see.]
2) "... However, it should in no way be associated with that great body of factual information relating to orthodox Zen Buddhist practice...." [Author's note.]
["Orthodox Zen Buddhist practice" I take to mean the details of orthodox doctorines of the religion but he retains the essence of Zen as in "D" above. In the R Pirsig interview at http://www.williammorrow.com/wm/features/may99/pirsig.html he does state that he considers himself a "Zen person". It appears when he writes and others write there is lots of Buddhism thinking in MofQ.]
F. Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, the book.
[Note. Keep in mind I have not read the whole book but have randomly sampled the parts about quality.]
Ok, I've started to make a big deal about reading too much into the literary structure of the book. It's about how the Zen experiences with motorcycles and other aspects of Phaedrus' (R Pirsig's) life lead to the development of a Philosophy of Reality and Quality.
I'll leave "D" and "E" as is for now and toss what I started to write for "F" into the Junk Pile Thoughts.
G. Getting from ZAMM to Metaphysics of Quality. (Their meanings.)
1. "... he (Pirsiq) is seeking to re-unite the fields of Art, Religion and Science in a new framework." [Anthony McWatt's topic, Pirsig's Metatphysics of Quality.]
2. "It concerns the central theme of this conference -- the meeting of art and science. {Science|subjects, objects, data} {Art|values} ... My own work is concerned with a Metaphysics of Quality that can cross over this division with a single overall rational framework. [Pirsig's Subject, Objects, Data, Values topic.]
3. "A metaphysics is a philosophy, a philosopher loves and pursues wisdom - the nature and meaning of existence (metaphysics), how we may know it to be so (epistemology), what we ought to do about it (ethics), etc..." and "The nature of reality is Quality, which is essentially undefinable but may be approximated as Good, Tao, God, Dharma, Excellence... Quality is not a thing. It is an event." [Richard Pretti's What is Metaphysics of Quality topic.]
4. "... the fundamental aim of this metaphysics is to provide a unified framework of thought within which both science and ethics can be rationally discussed." [Rory FitzGerald's The Nature of Natural Law, chp 2.]
5. "The Metaphysics of Quality is a philosophy, a theory about reality. It asks questions such as what is real, what is good and what is moral, and it comes up with some surprising conclusions about our lives and existence." [So what is Metaphysics of Quality, by Anthony McWatt.]
[I keep seeing this theme that Science (Objective) and Art (Subjective) have been viewed as being seperate things in the metaphysics world and that MofQ is a new/different metaphysical method of bringing them back together. There was reference on the interview page about the "divorce" between the two. As I understand it Prisig believes the two have always, in reality, been connected or part of the same "quality" but that metaphysics and the common impression seperated the two.
[I want to both agree and disagree. It's easy to see how some people seperate the two, art is art and science is science. Then they are those who see both the science in art and the art in science... without the need for metaphysics. The two have always worked together.
[Michealangelo's DAVID. The art (Subjective) part includes master sculpturer, skilled workmanship, pleasingly posed and proportioned, religious and historical significance and such. A person with more art knowledge could go on indefintely describing the art part. The science (Objective) part includes tool development, knowledge of human physiology (I think I read somewhere Michealangelo, maybe DeVinci, dissected cadaveurs to learn the human body), the geological history of the marble stone itself, its chemistry and why it's sculpturable and such.
[Intergrated circuits, microprocessors. The science (Objective) part includes all the basic electronic knowledge (transistors, diodes, resistors, most of the more exotic devices, ....), the physics of making them smaller and smaller, the mathematics of theory and design and so forth. The art (Subjective) part includes imaginative solutions to overcome design difficulties, the skill of toolmakers who built the parts to manufacture ICs, the history of their development (they came from the space program), the creative computer programming to make them useful, and so forth. Even a poster size image of the circuitry looks like a work of art.
[I guess what I'm trying to say is that the Objective world and the Subjective world have always been the One Real world. It's the Metaphysics that has supposedly divided and re-united the two worlds.]
Part 2, Forum topic, Pirsig's Metaphysics of Quality, by Anthony McWatt.
"This is his "Metaphysics of Quality" which by using an ancient Greek term for the Good he is seeking to re-unite the fields of Art, Religion and Science in a new framework."
"He (Pirsiq) soon realised that for centuries English rhetoric teachers had been passing and failing students on the quality of their work without any viable definition of what quality actually was. This strange state of affairs is what Pirsig attempted to end with his research."
"Pirsig thought the strange position of rhetoric and of Quality (or what the Ancient Greeks called the "Good") was due to Plato's division of the human soul into reason and emotion in his dialogue "Phaedrus"." [Summary: Leads to Subjective - Objective thinking from Aristole, Plato placed reason over emotion.]
"So, now in the West, we have objectivity, reason, logic and dialectic, on the one hand, while we have subjectivity, emotion, imagination, intuition and rhetoric, on the other. The former terms suggest scientific respectability while the latter are often assumed to be artistic terms having little or no place in science or rationality."
"It is this conception of rationality that Pirsig seeks to challenge by re-assessing how the spiritual, scientific and artistic worlds relate to each other."
[These state the source (Plato) of the division of the One Real world into the Objective and Subjective worlds. The *art of rationality ...* is alluded to also. See comments in Part 1-G, E-1.]
Diagram 1: Shows evoloution of static quality patterns versus time. Inorganic is base with biological next ascended pattern, then social, then intellectual. Diagram suggests each pattern is seperate with no interaction.
[Diagram implicitly suggests a next pattern above intellectual, perhaps the spiritual or religious pattern, utlimate true understanding. Diagram suggests each pattern is built upon the preceding ones, remove the inorganic base and the rest collaspes. Read in one of the topics that the patterns have their own rules and morals but do interact, conflict was mentioned.
[If I were to draw a diagram representative of Reality, it would be a splattering of colors all mixed together. Most everything interacts with most everything else to various degrees.]
Diagram 2: Subject - Object Metaphysics. Suggests two sets, {Subjective|Mind, Quality, Society} and {Objective|Matter, Quanity, Biology} which are non-intersecting sets seperated by "impassable void."
[Ok, it represents the SOM way of thinking and I agree with Pirsiq's opinion it was wrong to think that way. But I dont view Reality his way either.]
"When a subject-object metaphysics regards mind and matter as eternally separate and eternally alike, it creates a platypus bigger than the solar system. It has to make this fatal division because it gives top position in its structure to subjects and objects."
"The Metaphysics of Quality is a theory that perceives reality as being in a evolutionary moral order of intellectual, social, biological and inorganic (or chemical) patterns. It gives intellectual patterns moral primacy, then primacy to social patterns, then to biological patterns and finally to inorganic patterns. It describes and explains the nature of reality in the context of values and patterns (note: Patterns are repeated regular or logical forms of order; methodical and/or harmonious arrangement)."
[Reality is evolutionary, part of the Buddhism continouse flow of perceptions, yes I can agree. But evolutionary moral order? Pirsiq compares science and ethnics elsewhere, how atoms form molecules as being "morally correct". Actually, that's a function of atoms cooperating to form a mutally lower energy state. And, in the grander scheme of things, the universe has continuiously evolved from an initial, extremely high state of energy density into lower and lower energy density (expanding Universe). Even in Buddhist thought, the goal is to acheive a state of non-existence, ultimate peace. What does that mean in MofQ? It's morally correct to seek the path of least resistance; calm, peaceful energy states. His primacy order is reversed, intellect is highest energy state, inorganic is lowest. It's morally better to be the marble of Micheangelo's DAVID than the intellect that sculptured it.]
4. What does Pirsig mean by the term Quality?
"... the first slice of undivided experience."" [Buddhism concept of there's experience only, flow of perceptions. Other discussion that gets me confused."
5. What is immediate experience?
"Immediate experience is experience where there is no distinction between what is experienced and the act of experiencing itself. Only after the experience do concepts such as perceiver and perceived arise. It is illogical to put them otherwise. Experience (or Quality as Pirsig terms it) is an awareness of the changing flux of reality before any conceptual distinctions such as subjects and objects are made."
[4 and 5 are more explainations of Zen and Buddhist experience.]
6. Pirsig divides "immediate experience" into "Dynamic Quality" and "static quality".
"Dynamic Quality refers to what Buddhists would call unconditioned reality and static quality refers to conditioned reality."
[Static quality is concepts, Dynamic Quality is the flow of reality, I think.]
7. So how is Dynamic Quality differentiated from static quality?
"Dynamic Quality is the term given by Pirsig to the continually changing flux of immediate reality while static quality refers to any concept abstracted from this flux."
[Oh, ok, lucky guess.]
"It's important to keep all 'concepts' out of Dynamic Quality. Concepts are always static... I think it's better to say that *time* is a static intellectual concept (subjective) that is one of the very first to emerge from Dynamic Quality.... And if time is subjective that means Newton's laws of acceleration and many other laws of physics are subjective. Nobody in the scientific world wants to allow that. All this points to a huge fundamental metaphysical difference between the MOQ and classical science: The MOQ is truly empirical. Science is not. Classical science starts with a concept of the objective world - atoms and molecules - as the ultimate reality. This concept is certainly supported by empirical observation but it is not the empirical observation itself."
[In the theoretical physics world, the theory of *time* is as debatable as most any other physics concept. Stephen Hawking's BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME discusses it. But that's another topic all together.
[In the One Real world I see, time is the driving force or mechanism for the Dynamic Quality. Yet he has moved it into the static concept world (subjective) which leads to physics being subjective.
[Science has always been theories that best describe the empirical observations, the observations suggest the concept. Pirsiq views it as being the opposite. The flow of science is: observations of nature, concept of theory, empirical collection of data, mathematical development of theory, formulae for theory, test theory against observations. If the theory is true, predictions can be made and verified. The first failure of the theory causes the process to start over or at least refinements to be made.
[Time is the Dynamic Quality, it's what causes Science and Art to function as they do.
[Atoms and molecule as the ultimate reality isnt right, that's his materialist view. Grand Unification Theory is still the ultimate reality for the physics world. The theory from which all other particle and force theories are derived. Again, that's another topic altogether.]
9. So what is static quality?
"By static Pirsig doesn't refer to something that lacks movement in the Newtonian sense of the word but is referring to any repeated arrangement whether "inorganic" (e.g. chemicals, quantum forces), "organic" (e.g. plants, animals), "social" (e.g. cities, ant nests) or "intellectual" (e.g. thoughts, ideas) i.e. any pattern that appears long enough to be noticed within the flux of immediate experience."
10. How do these four static patterns of quality relate?
"The MOQ recognizes that the four static patterns of quality are related through cosmological EVOLUTION." [Evolution from inorganic, to biology, to society, to intellect.]
11. Why is evolution an important consideration in the MOQ?
"Evolution is an important consideration in the MOQ as a code of ethics can be generated from the four basic levels of quality patterns. Though each level of static patterns have emerged from the one below, each level follows its own different rules... but can clash." and "The MOQ combines the four levels of patterns to produce one overall moral framework based on an evolutionary hierarchy (as seen on the MOQ diagram)."
12. So what's the value of such a moral framework?
"By removing morals from social convention and placing them on a scientifically based theory of evolution the MOQ removes much of the cultural subjectivity that is inherent in many ethical beliefs." and "Moreover, by the use of an all-encompassing point of view taken from the very beginning of the universe, the MOQ produces new solutions to previously difficult problems." and "...what the Metaphysics of Quality concludes is that all schools are right on the mind and matter question. Mind is contained in static inorganic patterns. Matter is contained in static intellectual patterns. Both mind and matter are completely separate evolutionary levels of static patterns of value, and as such are capable of each containing the other without contradiction." [Compares vegeterian and carnivious cultures, exceptions being conditions such as famine. Rest of discussion are other examples of previous conflicts in metaphysics and how MofQ resolves the conflict. In other words, it's over my head.]
******* Refer Articles
Pirsig's MofQ by Anthony McWatt
Quality and Intelligence by John Beasley
What is the MofQuality by Rich Pretti
The Nature of Natural Law by Rory FitzGerald
Subjects, Objects, Data and Values by Robert M Pirsig
*******
******** Thought Junk Pile ********
[Empiricism: 1. use of methods based on experiment and observation. 2. undue reliance upon experience; unscientific practice; quackery. 3. the philosophical theory that all knowledge is based on experience.]
"The Metaphysics of Quality subscribes to what is called empiricism. It claims that all legitimate human knowledge arises from the senses or by thinking what the senses provide. ...." [Summary: MoQ says values of art and morality and religious mysticism are verifiable. Empiricists says they are not and invalids any knowledge gained from art, imagination, authority, theoretical reasoning.]
*******
Part 3, Metaphysics of Quality, General.
A. Metaphysics and Philosophy is same as Theory of Everything.
The subject is confusing to me as well and like you've said in one of your emails, it has become a Science itself. It's partly because it's new to me. I'm as unfamiliar with the terms and concepts as I am with the details of String Theory or Time Theory or details of any other physics or science theory. SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN is the only magazine I read now, I just have the layperson's understanding of sciences, mostly understand the concepts but it's beyond me how they develop them. Actually my interests for several years have become Cosomology and Religion, perhaps the Theory of Everything and how does Religion fit in with it. :)
B. My Zen experience into Enlightenment of Fortitude.
Don Adams' HITCHHIKER'S GUIDE TO THE UNIVERSE, "the meaning of Life, Universe and Everything... answer... 42." Ha. The local NPR radio station broadcasted that book as a series, I listened to it each night it was on, I hadnt read the books yet. So I'm sitting up town with my portable radio, at a cafe I think, no, out on the sidewalk outside the cafe. Street noises and all. Anyway, when they got to that part I strained to listen, what my mind heard was: "meaning of Life, Universe and Everything.... answer... fortitude."
Just goes to show, one hears what one wants, or expects to hear. I had wondered and guessed what it would be, but, without ever consciously arriving at an answer myself my sub-conscious had answered for me. It takes fortitude to endeavour and presevere though Life, to figure out the Meaning of the Universe and Everything.
What happened that evening as I sat on the sidewalk? It was that Zen Buddhist immediate experience of Enlightenment, that first slice of Quality as Pirsiq calls it, "Let go Luke, use the Force," from Obiwan Kanobi, it's was a product of everything (genetics, environment, experiences, all those connections) up to that point in my life. It has many names, but they all mean the same thing.
C. CONNECTIONS, MofQ was suppose to re-unit Science and Art.
In the SCI-AM magazine, James Burke writes a column called CONNECTIONS, he wrote the book and hosted PBS series by that name too. In the column he usually starts by describing some recent experience of his, the rest of the column tells of the events in Science (Objective) history, sometimes Art (Subjective) events too, that connected together to bring about his personal recent experience. What he does with Science I apply as well to the Theory of Everything. It's all connected together.
I've got a simple mind, the connections I see are plain and simple. I take the Zen of my experiences and extrapolate concepts. It's what everyone is capable of doing and does. That's the essence of Buddhism, all the rest is just details in doctrine and dogma, commentary. Metaphysics of Quality is the doctrine and dogma of Pirsiq's metaphysics. The lessons from the Zen part (motorcycle story) got left behind back in ZAMM during the development of Quality Theory details.
One could likewise compare Religions. There's the initial concept, "There is God", "There is Nirvia(sp?)", "There is the Summer Place" (Wicca), "There is the Ancestor Place" (Shintoism), all the rest is just commentary, details of doctrine and dogma. It's the details that come in to conflict, are difficult to grasp, yet they are all connected together and lead to the same goal.
D. Why look for answers in Metaphysics and Philosophy? First reduce the problem to the correct question.
One of the standard debates (fights) in religion chat was "Creationism versus Evolutionism." After several days and weeks of reading the chat when that topic came up, I realized the debate reduced down to opposing literalist viewpoints. The fundamental Bibical Creationist believes on Faith that the Creation story is literally true. The hardcore Evolutionist believes the Bible is literally true but in error. So, it's the literal interperation that's the debate difficulty. By the way, I think the Creationist is better off in the debate, they believe on their Faith. The Evolutionist is usually looking for something negative to prove another's Faith is false.
Why look in Holy Scriptures and Writings for the Truth about how the universe came about? We've got the original version, the universe itself. It's been studied, analysised, dissected, theorized from the smallest subatomic particles to it's latticework of galaxies and great voids, from its beginning to speculation about its ending. So now the debate becomes whether or not God created it, or if it's the way God created, or even if God was part of the creation process, or there's no God involved. These are the realities to debate.
If it reduces to a social and society problem, look there for answers. If it reduces to a physics problem, look there for answers. If it reduces to a political problem, look there for answers. If it reduces to a morality problem, look there for answers. If the connectivity between society, physics, politics, morality is faulty, look there for answers. But first, reduce it to the correct problem(s). If there's some viable cross-over solution (connections) from one area of knowledge to another, use it.
If there's some Zen experience in observing a bee trying to fly through glass that can be extrapolated (connected) into a social, physics, political, morality solution, use it. Dont develop any details of doctorine and dogma from/about the bee and glass.
Part 4, Fritzgerald's Nature of Natural Law, Abortion and MofQ.
A. The West.
Fritzgerald is implying one of two things. First is that MofQ is new and can provide guidence in solving this ethical/moral problem, ie, under what circumstances it is justifiable to do an abortion or not. Second is that MofQ is compatible with existing arguements used in this problem, ie, there's nothing special in MofQ that provides new enlightenment. I see the second case.
In either case the current question has been reduced to "When does viable intellect begin?" The original question in Roe vs Wade was... I'm not sure anymore, "Woman's right to control her own life?" "When does life begin?" Perhaps the conflict between the two was what the issue reduced to.
Let's start with Western thinking. Religiously it began with life must be given every opportunity to exist. Non-religiously as well, the first is basically the original Bibical commandment "Go forth and populate the world," compared with the natural commandment "Survival of the species." Contraception issue. Next was the issue of which had the greater value, the woman to her right to choose her life's path or the rights to another potential human's right to life. Life begins at conception versus life begins at birth issue. Next came a series of issues, particular circumstances, complications that threatened the woman's life, rape and incest, deformity in development, a last resort to birth control, .... Perhaps all of these were Quality of life for either the woman or the child issues. It has more recently included the man, something that's always been there but not much discussed. "The man's rights to choose his life's path versus the woman's right to choose her life's path."
But all of this returns us to the current question, from the MofQ perspective, "When does viable intellect begin?" From non-MofQ perspective it is still, "When does viable life begin?" Has the problem been reduced to the correct question? I think not.
Back to MofQ's hierarchy of static patterns: inorganic, biological, society, intellectual. There's still the implied pattern next up after intellectual. The Dynamic Quality contains the evolutionary process from which the hierarchy is derived, it is a continuing process and I see no reason why it should stop at intellectual. Using Pirsiq's Buddhism I would put Enligthenment there, even though I think he says Enlightenment exists within each pattern and across them, another part of the Dynamic Quality. If not Enlightenment, then Spiritual, Religious, Ultimate understanding of Reality and Knowledge.
Since the finial objective (goal) is to reach what follows intellect, decisions within each pattern and across them should be directed (naturally or forced by intellect) toward that goal. The correct question as I see it, "Does allowing potential life progress toward or regress from the objective?"
"Woman's and/or man's right to chose her/his life's path," "Rape or incest," "Birth control," "Deformity", .... These are some of the reasons, or specific circumstances, not the issues. Allowing or not allowing abortion for any of them does not decide whether or not progress or regress is done. It what happens afterwards.
If she wants the abortion that implies she would not be a proper mother, the un-wanted child with all the problems and difficulties associated with that. (For that particular pregnancy, I dont want it sound like she couldnt be proper mother later). Regressive, so the abortion is allowed.
If she can deal the seperation after birth and give the child up for adoption or to the father, a childless couple or the father gets the opportunity to raise the child properly. Progressive, so the abortion is not allowed.
What happens when there's conflict between the two? The woman wants the abortion but the father wants the child. There're variations in particular circumstances, the father's died but the grandparents want the child, the father wants the abortion but the woman wants the child. A net balance between regressive or progressive needs to be determined. The pregnancy is temperal and the emotional attachment may or may not be temperal. The desire for a child implies a long term emotional attachment. The potential for a progressive net balance is more likely, provided a reasonable compromise can be achieved between the two involved. Progressive, so the abortion is not allowed. The previous I think is the greater majority of how these decisions are made, the one's that dont make the news.
Forcing or coercing the decision (society's and intellect's legal/moral pattern) to either allow or not allow is regressive. Stalemate? Indeterminate? Is the net balance progressive or regressive? MofQ appears to suggest potential for intellect is the more valued and the abortion would not be allowed. That unknown something-or-other beyond intellectual suggests the net balance needs to be determined. In either case, it's the woman's choice. She will or will not have the abortion, legally, morally, ethically right or wrong.
Which leads us into the Randomness in the Dynamics of Evolution Theory. :) Which, by the way, I havent found any mentioned of randomness in MofQ. Even the find in page function does not locate the word. What does that mean? Randomness is part of Reality for me.
B. The East.
In Eastern or more appropriately non-Western thinking there are additional issues and values. In some cultures, value is reversed on the size of the family, more is better than few, few better than none. In some cultures value is placed on having a male heir or female heir or both. The questions/issues in these cultures include, "Abort/kill female life in preference to male life?" In some cultures the first born must be male. "Large individual familys versus over population?" "Having children till there's a male/female/both heirs versus over population?" It these types of cultures, I think the current question has been reduced to "Value in society as a whole versus value in traditional customs." I think most non-Western thinking has already decided viable life begins with conception, if not before, there's reincaration thought here. A man, Chinese from Twian, I use to work with told me a child is concidered one year old when born.
In Western thinking it is the value of individual rights and the collective of those rights that is place higher than the value of society rights. In Eastern thinking the values are reversed, value of society as a whole is greater than the rights of the individuals and the collective of those rights. Eastern MofQ static pattern hierarchy: inorganic, biological, intellectual, society.
This becomes more so when over population is a real factor as it exists in India, Bangladish, China, Japan. The Dynamic Quality is operating in a different part of the its performance curve. That's the engineering part of my mind thinking, your car starts up a hill, the required dynamics (over population vs society) have changed, it automatically shifts to a lower gear for more torque (change in order of society/intellect pattern).
Western MofQ: The intellectual concept of individual rights is valued more the an over populated society, change society values (population control) to protect the intellectual.
Eastern MofQ: If the society becomes threatened by the intellectual concept of traditional values of family (large size) change the intellectual concept (population control) to protect society. Almost but not quite the same.
What is the result if over population goes unchecked in Western and Eastern MofQ? West: Over population leads to society collapse and takes the intellect down with it. East: Over population leads to society collapse and the intellect remains to rebuilt.
Again, there's that unknown something-or-other beyond Eastern's MofQ society and how to reach the goal. The correct question as I see it is the same for both West and East, "Does allowing potential life progress toward or regress from the objective (goal)?" When over population becomes a real factor, its regressive, abortions and birth control allowed.
Now, the conflict. The desire for a male/female/both heirs is still part of the intellect-society patterns. The conflict between society mandated birth control and traditional family values leads to aborting/killing in order to meet the value of society (replacement only rule for population control). Is there a conflict? Population is controlled either way, though the reasons for doing the aborting and killing are different. Is it morally, ethically right? The West and East mindsets are different, individually they both say no, but the East does it anyway with great sorrow. Will the West do the same when over population becomes a real factor? Probably, the West is just doing a better job of delaying that time. Which brings to mind, When is when in the West? The quality of an individual's life is valued highly in the West which leads to a lower tolerance for over population. When is sooner in the West than the East. Consider the high population densities areas in the West as compared to the low densities areas.
C. That unknown something-or-other beyond ....
That unknown something-or-other beyond (West) intellectual and (East) society in MofQ, what is it? Enlightenment, Spiritualism, Religious, The Force, God, Pure Correct Thought, Ultimate understanding of Reality and Knowledge? Or does it matter?
All the problems (not just abortion) reduce down to one correct question. "Does the [insert issue/problem/decision here] move us progressively forward toward the goal or regressively away from the goal?"
******** Misc Refer Notes
http://www.williammorrow.com/wm/features/may99/pirsig.html
Q: You write of a "divorce" between art and technology. Have we moved toward healing this breach in the last quarter century? Have computers made us more comfortable with technology?
A: No, computers are just more technology. The divorce has to be healed at a much higher level than that. At this point the narrator is laying ground for the discussion of quality that comes later. Quality is the common ground of art and technology.
Q: Are you currently at work on any literary projects?
A: No. Enough is enough. I think it's bad to write when you don't really have a compelling need to say something. Of course, for most writers the compelling need is money, but my two books have taken care of that. Anyway, I think of myself as more of a Zen person than a writer and one of the most admirable aspects of Zen is that it encourages silence.
********
http://www.moq.org/
About:
The Metaphysics of Quality is a philosophy, a theory about reality. It asks questions such as what is real, what is good and what is moral, and it comes up with some surprising conclusions about our lives and existence.
As the title of Pirsig's first book, suggests, much of the MOQ has to do with a non-intellectual Zen-like view of the universe.
Yet Pirsig departs from Eastern thinking by arguing that reason and logic are just as important in seeking understanding.
Pirsig is not the first philosopher to try and bridge the gap between science and mysticism, however with the MOQ he elevates the whole debate to a new level by structuring both paradigms round a single concept -- value. Pirsig throws new light on issues such as mind and matter, the behavior of particles at the quantum level and the nature of consciousness. At the social level there is much to say about racial tension, celebrity cults and mental illness.
Forum:
Topic: So what is Pirsig's "Metaphysics of Quality"?
The Metaphysics of Quality is a theory that perceives reality as being in a evolutionary moral order of intellectual, social, biological and inorganic (or chemical) patterns. It gives intellectual patterns moral primacy, then primacy to social patterns, then to biological patterns and finally to inorganic patterns. It describes and explains the nature of reality in the context of values and patterns (note: Patterns are repeated regular or logical forms of order; methodical and/or harmonious arrangement).
Pirsig adds the following:
"The Metaphysics of Quality subscribes to what is called empiricism. It claims that all legitimate human knowledge arises from the senses or by thinking what the senses provide. Most empiricists deny the validity of any knowledge gained through imagination, authority, tradition, or purely theoretical reasoning. They regard fields such as art, morality, religion, and metaphysics as unverifiable. The Metaphysics of Quality varies from this by saying that the values of art and morality and even religious mysticism are verifiable and that in the past have been excluded for metaphysical reasons, not empirical reasons. They have been excluded because of the metaphysical assumption that all the universe is composed of subjects and objects and anything that can't be classified as a subject or an object isn't real. There is no empirical evidence for this assumption at all. It is just an assumption."
(Robert Pirsig, LILA, Black Swan, 1991, rep.1994, p.121)
Topic: Subjects, Objects, Data
The title of what I have to say today is "Subjects, Objects, Data and Values." It concerns the central theme of this conference -- the meeting of art and science. Science is all about subjects and objects and particularly data, but it excludes values. Art is concerned primarily with values but doesn't really pay much attention to scientific data and sometimes excludes objects. My own work is concerned with a Metaphysics of Quality that can cross over this division with a single overall rational framework.
M of Q, Contents
© jwhughes 1999