> >
> > ERIN: All things human and nonhuman have aspects of dynamic and static
> Quality within them but dynamic and static are human constructs also.
These
> constructs also divide the world. Dynamic and Static quality may be
inherent in the
> > nonverbal objects but without these constructs do they "know" that.
Humans
> may "know" this through classic and romantic perspectives but can we
know it
> > through both perspectives simultaneously. Have you really dissolved
the
> > duality with a linear diagram or is a linear diagram just a duality
> without an explicit divider.
>
> My [Gary] reply to Erin: All things human and nonhuman are holons, and
one of the properties of
> all things that are holons is that they have Dynamic -- Static Quality.
> Dynamic -- Static Quality is like gravity. They are all nonverbal forces
> which existed since the beginning of the creation of the universe and
thus
> before humans who came to recognize the phenomenon and thus invented the
> words Dynamic and Static Quality. The words are human constructs and the
> words point toward non-human, pre-verbal and still very real phenomenon.
My
> map is linear because we think in linearity. It is a feeble human
attempt
> to illustrate the simultaneous continuous interaction that is going on,
but
> in order to derive any understanding we humans must create static
> illustrations -- maps of what is going on and then describe our created
> static maps. These static maps exhibit to us a sequential nature for our
> sample of some of the events taking place. Duality is not a
contradiction
> but a part of the complementarity aspect of reality. Complementarity as
in
> the principle articulated by Niels Bohr. See Pirsig's essay "Subjects,
> Objects, Data and Values" posted at the web site. Pirsig says that
Bohr's Complementarity is pointing toward an understanding of Quality! Also
I will be submitting
> an essay discussing Pirsig's essay and the concept of Complementarity.
The
> essay will be entitled: 'On the Making of Maps of Reality.'
> >>
>
>Squonk's reply to Gary:
Hi there,
> Your approach here is confused in my view.
> I feel you have a severe predisposition to locking into classic mode of
> thought?
>
> The MOQ is a postulation, and as far as postulates go i feel it to have
high
> value.
> In your writing above you mention other postulates among which are:
Mapping,
> Holons, dualism, complementarily.
> If non of these other postulates have greater value than the MOQ then what
is
> the point of going on about them other than to show them to be less
adiquate
> than the MOQ itself?
Gary's response to Squonk: The term mapping comes from the idea first
stated by Alfred Korzybski in 1933 in the phrase "The map is not the
territory." The territory is reality, which in MoQ terms means Quality.
All human attempts to describe, explain, discuss, relate to, label, etc
quality is the acting of making maps. Thus mapping is one of the highest
Dynamic Quality terms in any metaphysical vocabulary. The MoQ is a map of
the territory, the non-verbal, pre-intellectual Quality!
And since the term mapping describes the act of making MoQ it is of higher
value than MoQ by itself. Unfortunately there is no avoiding that term
since it is the only tool that will enable you to have insight into what it
is that you, Pirsig, and we are all doing when we are here discussing MoQ.
We are discussing the map of the territory known by the word Quality.
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 - 16:02:16 BST