The static latch that is especially needed is a clear explanation of why Quality is NOT emotivism. Since the transcending of the subject-object dualism is the foundation of the whole idea of Quality, I think that anyone attempting to understand it must first understand why Quality is not "just what you like".
----- Original Message -----
From: Matt the Amazing Technicolor Dream Coat
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 7:42 PM
Subject: Re: MD/MF Highlights
I don't know what everyone else thinks about this whole "Greatest Hits" thing, but here's some of the things that went through my head:
One: Why does an idea have to fit in a single paragraph? I can understand why Chris might want it that way, for logistical reasons, but ideas are usually completely mis-understood out of context.
Two: Chris said "If we don't agree on a static-latch, I think the MoQ is destined to fall victim to much unnecessary repetition and stagnation." We don't have to agree on anything here. This is not about setting up the MoQ for all time. Chris's statement makes philosophy sound positivistic, which, let me tell you, it ain't. The Analytic philosophers would like philosophy to be positivistic. In the process of deciding how to do that (at the beginning of the 20th C.) most decided that the term "philosophy" should just be discarded wholesale so that they could get on with problems that they could solve, like logic problems. They want philosophy to look like algebra. Unfortunately for them, most other philosophers disagree. Philosophy is about dissolving problems of thought and the further along we get in philosophy the more problems that appear. You'll remember Pirsig referring to these as "platypi". And I, like others here, think the MoQ dissolves the most, but that's not to say that others don't appear.
Three: This is not intellectual masturbation (though I, myself, have used the phrase before). This (at least for me, maybe you all are masturbating) is intellectual exercise. I get exercise and my ideas get exercise. Not everything said on here is coherent or finished. But if I do say something that is coherent or finished, it usually gets drug up for insertion into an essay.
And that leads to
Four: Chris is right. This discussion group is not a static latch, it is Dynamic. And while I like what I've seen of Lila's Child (mad-props to you, Dan), to me, the real static latch for a person's ideas is an essay. An essay (or book or whatever) forces you to find what can become static out of all the Dynamic meanderings. Dynamic meanderings are important and their postings can help gain new insight and perspective, but the real test is in essay form. Because then everything is coherent and, hopefully, easy to understand so as to have other people concur with your ideas.
That's what I think. That's why I like writing essays, having them read, and getting feedback. I don't wanna' just propagate some idea, I want to continue the evolution of my own ideas. And if I do help propagate an idea, good, maybe it's worthy. As far as I'm concerned, none of my ideas are ready for a static latch. They are all malleable; new light is thrown in different directions all the time. And that's why I like this website. It's bright as day in here.
Because Chris was "so bold",
Matt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:25 BST