All
Jonathan started this thread with:
> However, one thing Wim said in the "logical conclusions thread" got me
> thinking about a big mistake many MoQers tend to make in elevating the
> dynamic without sufficient attention to static restraints (latching).
> I really don't understand how one "follows" dynamic quality. The dynamic
> than can be followed is not the real dynamic!
>From numerous prior discussions here I've concluded that dynamic quality
is kinda like them pesky Injuns. About the time you think you've got
them cornered in a box canyon they appear on the canyon walls above you
hurling insults and arrows. DQ's apparent paradoxical nature, being at
once a direction, a goal, an "Ah Hah" event, and direct everyday
experience surely contributes to this confusion. I think Jonathan's
original statement also contains the word (attention) which has the
potential to resolve some of this confusion.
In a book on consulting I ran across this quote from the Inner Game
books by Tim Gallaway.
"The only thing we control in our lives is where we place our attention."
Where that attention is placed, to use another quote from the same book,
is in a large part based on:
1. How [we] percieve [our] current reality (perception skills)
2. How [we] interpret those perceptions, that is, how [we] are thinking
about [our] reality (thinking skills); and
3. How [we] see [ourselves] acting as a result. (behavioral skills)
All of these skills are static patterns of value. The MoQ, or any
philosophy for that matter, first and foremost appeals to our thinking
(intellectual) skills in an effort to modify them such that our
behavioral and perception skills can change in such a way as to better
attuned us to reality.
IMHO one of the key 'thinking' insights of the MoQ is that Dynamic
Quality is "direct everyday experience". Or direct everyday experience
is dynamic, always changing, always in flux, "born again" instant by
instant. So when Jonathan doesn't understand how one "chooses" to
follow dynamic quality I understand and agree with the objection. One
does not choose to follow dynamic, dynamic quality is part and parcel of
being. No dynamic quality, no being.
That being said; Pirsig, Wilbur, many Eastern philosophies/religions,
and in particular Zen Buddhism, suggest that with the appropriate
attitude, training, and practice it is possible to "attend" to the
dynamic at a much higher level than most of us normally do.
And how do all these theories suggest this is done? By moving through,
or attaining, or evolving, or attending, to ever higher levels of static
quality.
So when Jonathan suggests that many MoQer's "elevating the dynamic
without sufficient attention to static" I feel he is spot on.
The path to dynamic quality is paved with static stones slowly laid one
in front of the other over the course of a lifetime.
3WD
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 - 16:01:42 BST