TO: MOQ
RE: SUMMARY OF THE DECEMBER SEMI-MODERATED DISCUSSION
Earlier in the month, JOHN and ROGER cut out the following from one of
ROGER's posts and suggested that we experiment with a focused discussion,
where one of us summarize and semi-moderate the discussion rather than
leaving it strung out and incomplete. The idea was to see if it could work,
and if so, use it as a starting place for future focused discussions. Anybody
could start a thread, keep the discussion going with questions and reminders,
and then offer a summary, which anybody could then add or subtract to/from.
This is my second attempt at a summary. Comments/corrections are welcome, and
if someone wants to continue the discussion, that is fine too. In this case
this will be 'intermission'.
**TO SET UP THE QUESTION, ROGER WROTE:
"I agree that we can't know for sure which changes
are improvements until new ideas are tried, however, I do suspect that there
are patterns to success (In other words, we can't be sure where DQ is, but we
can be pretty sure where it is very unlikely to be found. The solution isn't
entirely random imo.
What do the patterns of higher quality have that those of destruction, decay
and disorder don't? That is to me the fundamental question arising out of the
MOQ."
**THE ANSWERS:
In response, CLAY and SOJ stressed that we need to focus on the dynamic.CLAY
called it enthusiasm. ROB, on the other hand, suggested that the answer
lies with more toward the static side with survivability.
Most participants responded with a classic two-pronged static/dynamic MOQ
response. MARCO suggested that what patterns of higher quality have is an
ability to find answers that lead to new questions. BARD offerred that the
solution was compassion and passion. WIM referred to the two balanced forces
as stability and versatility. ROGER (plagiarizing BARD and JOHN) called the
static quality 'harmony across the greatest span and depth,' and suggested
that the route to this harmony was to establish a self-supporting
environment. He referred to the dynamic part of the solution as
'creativity.' MARCO found quality in the Span and Depth angle too, but PLATT
was never converted.
Though it was his post bringing this aspect of Wilber to the discussion, JOHN
commented on the inherent futility in reaching harmony across the full
span and depth, especially considering the disparities in the levels of
consciousness between people. But, as MARCO's
answers-leading-to-new-question approach shows, this isn't so much a problem
to be solved as one that we continuously improve upon.
**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.
BARD recommended 'good intentions', though he was careful to point out (amid
criticism) that his definition of good intentions requires "wisdom, tolerance
and patience."
ROGER and BARD stressed the path was to pursue harmony.
WIM similarly suggested getting in tune with something bigger than one's
self, and to fit into a bigger pattern.
3WD also said we should 'attune ourselves,' that we should 'get in the zone'
and that the path was paved with static stones.
JOHN found value in 3WD's path metaphor and suggested that the key to this
path lies in discriminating what is from what is illusion, and that each step
leads to reconciliation of discrepencies and incompleteness. He commented
that the path is ultimately one of 'discarded illusion.'
JON mentioned that the path is working on one's motorcycle, CLAY suggested
that we open up to the broader universe, and SOJ wrote that we should be
silent and create an opening.
**OFFSHOOT ON DESTRUCTION:
A spin off conversation involved a number of people, including DAVOR, CLAY
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 and MARCO agreed
with him, but those originally espousing this view never responded (at least
conclusively) to the counter.
**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.
Please critique/clarify/challenge/refute etc.
Rog
PS -- I did not include posts which made no sense to me, or which used the
wrong heading. I apologize in advance for editorial bias. It is probably
unavoidable. The solution which John and I were suggesting to the bias
complaint is that anybody can volunteer to monitor. In fact, anybody can feel
free to do their own summary of THIS discussion. This answer to lack of focus
is not the final answer, and it leads invariably to more questions.
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 - 16:01:45 BST