Rob and All
You wrote:
> Hmm I see your perspective about the yoga staring into the sun idea,
> but I disagree. You see the rejection of all other level of
> experience for it, certainly a bad idea, but I don't think you see
> the quality in the experience itself. Although you don't believe it,
> I do believe that there definitely is a connection between MOQ and
> these experiences.
"These experiences". Do you mean drugs and yoga? Maybe yoga
and various "vision quests", but the use of drugs - not in my book!
OK, any mental state is of course induced by some chemicals:
hormones, dopamine, enkephalins ...etc. but injecting such mind-
altering stuff artificially will be damaging - except as a medical
treatment.
> MOQ is the framework which can explain these high quality
> experiences. The experience in and of itself is not as high quality
> as living a rich life full of people, the simple pleasures and
> thinking,
Yes, there is a MoQ explanation for these experiences, but if there
is any gain in pursuing them - by these means - I doubt.
> but if that one experience can make one appreciate these things and
> point one in the direction of improvement, it is high quality. In
> the same way that thinking may not be a quality experience in and of
> itself (you never hear people say "man, thinking , what a high!")
> but thinking can identify what things to do to maintain high quality
> experiences in other areas (eg. biologically and socially).
Fasting and strenuous exercises are means to obtain a mystic
state, even the famous "lovers" made something out of the sexual
act than mere orgasm ...it sounds like a "quest for visions". This is
a much sought-after experience, but my doubt is if it leads to
anything else than a short-lived "experience". (thus speaks an old
man :-)
> MOQ is a
> way of how to think to maintain high quality (productive) thoughts
> that can improve ones life in all those areas.
Yes, that's it. An "encounter" with DQ that may lead to anything
new MUST have its base in Intellect - the religious/yoga, sex and
drug exercises won't.
> Why these yogics are a
> bad representation of the transcendental experience is that I doubt
> that they've ever had one. They know it's out there and are
> attempting to attain it. Once they did, though, they would realize
> that they were fools wasting their time for this experience when
> they could be attaining high quality experiences in their life.
OK, it seems like we agree :-).
> If you've ever seen
> Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, the place where the main character
> was would be akin to that, realizing that he is wasting his time
> when he could be with the woman he loves. That realization is a high
> quality experience, because it drives change. Looking at your life,
> and realizing that you're living it and seeing the quality. Where's
> the connection then? Seeing one's life from the perspective of the
> universe (the cutting edge of reality) could be scary. Seeing
> everything again for the first time. It leaves a person asking, what
> am I? what the hell is really going on here?, wow.
No, I haven't seen the dragon (film/series?), but I think that the
"universal" perspective is intellect at-the-end-of-its-tether, however
for Pirsig it lead to the conception of the MoQ which means that it
has become a new stable level (God, whatever route I take I face
the MoQ=5th level solution) and that we - now - see it as Quality.
ize. Before, from a SOM perspective, it was someting spiritual. Stll
a great experience!!!
> The experience of
> transcendence breaks the intellectual SOM static pattern if it isn't
> ignored. MOQ re-builds the static patterns and some of those
> questions can be answered again. The connection between MOQ and the
> experience of transcendence is that they are both outside the SOM
> static pattern. MOQ however allows for such an experience and SOM
> does not. That is the connection. By being "over and above" SOM, MOQ
> can include experiences that are outside the SOM static pattern.
How do you - Robert - look upon my "Q-intellect=SOM" idea? The
above sounds just like it. All in all I find your perception of the MoQ
very like my own.
> Lets be honest
> here, we (for the most part) all believe in MOQ. But society in
> general has no reason to do so really. What experiences of most
> people are outside the predominant metaphysics? What is the drive to
> overcome the inertia? Only an experience that is outside the
> metaphysics would be enough for it. That is the connection between
> MOQ and the experience of Transcendence. Rob
Agree! Phaedrus' experience was outside the predominant SO
Metaphysics, but ........follow this idea: SOM's emergence from
the - then - "predominant metaphysics" (which IMO was the social
level) was just as "unreasonable". Inertia will be overcome
eventually.
Bo
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 - 16:01:30 BST