Hi all,
(Roger, excuse me for not pursuing tha "political" discussion. I find it
futile.)
> Why is it migrating towards
> Dynamic Quality? It must be because DQ is inherently higher up on the totem
> pole. Why is it higher? Its higher for the same reason that Quality exists
in
> the first place: the world wouldn't function if it weren't or at least it
> wouldn't look the way it does. (ZAMM Ch. 18)
I've always hated this phrase "migrating towards Dynamic Quality". I don't
think it really means anything. We always measure migration in terms of static
patterns. You start with one set of static patterns and end up with another.
Pirsig almost got it right in his discussion of evolution, where he asks "but
has anyone ever asked if evolution is evolving *away* from anything?".
As I have pointed out before, Pirsig doesn't appear to realize that he has hit
upon a main idea in Darwinian evolution. Things move away from static patterns
by mutation - a dynamic, pattern breaking process. If by chance the mutation
is favourable ("natural selection"), it latches as a new static pattern.
Thus, the importance of DQ in the evolutionary process is that it allows
static patterns to be broken and replaced by better static patterns.
Jonathan
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
