Hi Mistidawg Rog (no more Risky Biz?)
great work.
I've been lately too busy, but I'm glad to spend few minutes now jumping in and offering few points. I've not read with the right care all the posts, so forgive me if I've lost something. Actually, the moderator is here for that, right? :-)
> **THE ANSWERS:
Ok
> **THE PATH:
> Quite a few participants addressed the issue of how to follow
> the path to higher Quality from a more personal perpective.
> The recommendations were startlingly similar.
This sub-thread about good intentions reminds me our old thread about science/art/intellect/purpose/method... I think you will remember. Trying a definition of intellectual pattern, I suggested that we enter the intellectual realm when we have the purpose to investigate universe (our "self" included). Your idea was that intention is not enough, and that intellect is made of higly refined -by method- patterns.
Since then, I've come to he conclusion that intention is about the MOQ static level of our actions, while method is about the High Quality of our actions. The Bard example of the beast destruction shows that the intention leads to a Q-level (to eat is biological; to show my fellows my power is social; to study its morphology is intellectual). Instead of intention or purpose, I think we can use the term "focus". The more we act focusing on one level, the less we lose the sight on the other possible static outcomes of our actions. The best path to Quality should be to act without focusing too much on one only level, in order to avoid a sort of dictatorship of a static level (jungle law, fascism, communism are examples). I think this is exactly what John says when he talks of greatest *span*.
Of course, if we don't focus on one level, it's hard to act according to, or create, higly refined patterns. Scientific method is a great example of great focus on one particular (intellectual) level. The love for our kids is another example of great focus on the social level. It is clearly High Quality to love our family (even if sometimes it can lead to mistakes); but that does not mean that we are not social if we are not good parents: in that case, we are just acting according to Low Quality social patterns. Generally, we can act according to High Quality (refined) patterns when we are focused on every single level. I think this is exactly what John says when he talks of greatest *depth*.
In few words, high attention to all the possible static outcomes of our acts. Care for your motorcycle. Make it work in a perfect way, and in harmony with your self and with all universe.
> **OFFSHOOT ON DESTRUCTION:
> A spin off conversation involved a number of people,
> including DAVOR, CLAY, MARCO, and JOHN,
> who argued that death, destruction and decay CAN
> be of high quality. They gave numerous examples.
> However, ROGER countered each of these and
> suggested that in every case people were either
> confusing destruction with flexibility and adaptiveness,
> or they were citing examples of circular processes where
> destruction was leading to reconstruction, and that it was
> the reconstruction which they saw as good. RICK agreed
> with him, but those originally espousing this view never
> responded (at least conclusively) to the counter.
I've been in agreement with you since the beginning. I think I've never said that destruction *per se* is of high quality. I've just said that usually it's necessary to make room. The process can be circular (example: a gasoline engine. Four phases, but just one is propulsion) or discrete (example: the Copernican revolution). Of course, Quality is shown by the overall process.
By the way. I've offered above three possible focuses for the beast destruction. There's a fourth one. *Pure destruction*, with no other purpose is IMO *focusing on the inorganic level*: it is the intention to eliminate everything, even life, with no remuneration for change. For what I know, it's a rare behavior. Even who commits suicide has usually some dim purpose. Probably, we just find this kind of inorganic focus in natural disasters like eartquakes.
> **SUMMARY:
> A clear pattern developed to the various answers
> to the question. Overwhelmingly, participants
> stressed that patterns of higher quality achieve a
> Dynamic/static balance, and that the way to find
> this balance is by attuning one's self to the broader universe.
That's a good conclusion.
Ciao,
Marco
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 - 16:01:43 BST