Foreword: This was written through the previous week and tried sent
Saturday morning, but it wasn't successful. Now at 10 AM Sunday
there's a new batch of posts that may make this more outdated than it
already was, but anyway: here it is:
BO LIMPS BACK MUCH ENCOURAGED BY HORSE'S ARRIVAL, DONNY'S CALM
REASON AND KEITH'S ATTEMPT ON A MOQ "PRINCIPIA MOQITIS" AND OTHER
SIGNS OF NORMALITY....AND ASSUMES A "HIGH NOON " ATTITUDE.
==========================================================
Hi everyone. I am not "hurt", but as Donny said, merely preparing a
show of my paintings (that's my art Rick. If it is "fine" I don't
know, but it's wrestling with the muse all right). Besides it is
useful to step back for a while and read other peoples' messages more
thoroughly than when occupied with one's own formulations - a new
experience for one who has been at it for ever. It has made me
realize what a great group this is
HORSE
Good to have you back, moving house is no small task. I agree totally
with your mind-a-red-herring passage. I guess we'll have to have a
session on why mind is "fishy" in a MOQ context, and - if a consensus
is reached - have it written in our catechism to prevent it from
appearing every time someone new arrives.
DONNY.
Great writings! You answered the questions put to me better than I
may have done myself, re. the one from Rick about subject-object
logic instead of S-O thinking (and its first version S-O
metaphysics). And I liked your formulations about our ongoing
sub-debate, we may both like a little edge to it.
Your elaborations on religion in various cultural guises was
just splendid. It's not necessarily saving of souls and afterlife
that is the core of IT ALL.
JONATHAN.
Salt is antiseptic so it prevented infection :-). Donny answered the
ZMM/ZAMM thing. No more than that is involved.
Regarding my statement about Intellect being the "enemy" of the LS. It
was a response to Roger's (?) Japan-attacking-the-LS allusion which I
interpreted as (him hinting to) social values' counterattack on
Intellect. I wielded the idea that the LS is the beginning of a
movement BEYOND intellect and consequently "ganging up with" Society.
But I feel that you and Fintan advocate some reversal to Social
values as top notch and that is not my idea.
About the MOQ as a computer OS. Very apt. A system must stand
abuse without crashing and that is what we are witnessing right now.
I appreciated your statement that you regard the SOLAQI as a MOQ
description of SOM. Great!. Also your kind remarks to me was
savoured.
WALTER.
I haven't welcomed you properly so hereby... Don't be shy about your
English, it's a long time since it was - you know - English, and
besides you sound completely fluent to me.
I was struck by your response to Keith's MOQ genealogy where you
point to the 2D/3D (perhaps the MOQ can be seen as a 4D) perspective.
Yes, I think it can be argued that the various levels- appearance are
not synchronized - except the Inorganic which is the material
universe itself. Life, Society and Intellect - even beyond
Intellect - may have occurred before and become extinct (not to speak
of extraterrestrials!), but this is no objection to Keith's effort or
to the Q idea as such.
GLOVE.
As you said, the first passage of this excerpt
> My opinion is that meditation is.......etc
> it is the intellect that is experienced when all
> social patterns of value are quieted in meditation and zazen.
is mine, but I must join
GENE
in his puzzlement over your continuation (about intellect). I regret
not having answered your previous entries on our common
"consciousness/awareness" issue, I am striving to pinpoint what it is
that dissonance with me, but we will find out when/if "mind" becomes
the program.
FINTAN.
The way Pirsig uses the term "metaphysics" is as the basic
understandings about reality. I am thorougly fed up with the paradigm
shift the New-Aage spiritual world-view is supposed to be. It's not
an iota different from the materialist, only a shift to the
subjective - mind/spiritual/soul..you name it - half. They are
in separate corners, but solidly within the same frame of
reference, and both parties don't understand the first thing about
the MOQ. Which proves....!
We would probably have members by the droves if the LS put
your gospel up front and declared itself a New-Age group, but much
better a handful who see the revolutionary aspect of Pirsig's ideas
than that, so please stop the silly saint antics. Dont you see, it's
all the lure of the SOCIAL; holy communion, salvation, emotion,
love. Social value is an immensely strong static latch and the MOQ
doesn't disregard it - far from it - the Quality idea is to SEE these
dimensions of existence for what they are WORTH, but also to see
that returning to social bliss is degrading, there is only forward,
more REASON.
If social value revival is your concern it is taken care of with
the notion of a budding movement beyond Intellect (such a new level
will necessarily see Intellect as its "enemy" and join force with
Society in the same way as Intellect and Biology gangs up against
Society. If this is your business, Fintan, I am all with you, but to
see it this way you have to accept MOQ static sequence as it is
given by Pirsig.
It is the introduction of mind and mirror levels that makes me
wary that you may not have grasped the very essence of the MOQ
(what's next: the notorious causal and whatever planes of nuage?) . I
prefer to think otherwise, your argumentation to underpin the pattern
recognition is impressive and sounds sound, and will possibly improve
upon the MOQ .... like I hope my own pet SOLAQI will, but without
naming it MoB. :-)
RICK and KILIAN said it: You are not to be thrown from trains or
out of doors, but you have to show what the weaknesses of the MOQ
are, and how your MoM is a metaphysical departure from
it....EXCEPT BACK TO SOM as I suspect. No irony or derision from my
side, I want to know...... but not necessarily today :-).
This sounds like a "High Noon" challenge, but let me tell you that I
read your Death in Dallas piece with tears in my eyes. It's just
.......good.
DIANA
My suggestion for next month's program is "Mind in a MOQ context".
It's from there all our trouble stems.
GUNN (Era)
A mystery. Your message reached Gene Kofman, but did not show up at my
end. Was that the Tromsö incident? :-)
=============================================================
A final word from the self-appointed "guardian". I just received a
reply from Pirsig to my request for his opinion about the SOLAQI
idea, but he refuses to comment it further than he did in the letter
to Anthony. So that's it. Btw, he is back from a trip to France, and
the Morrow publishing company is preparing an anniversary edition of
the ZAMM. Hope that the LS could have a batch of signed copies.
The discussion races on and there are issues raised, ideas forwarded
and question posed that have been left behind in the dust. For
example DAN COZORT's request for educational inputs. Are you
still with us MAGGIE HETTINGER? Couldn't you look into it? I will
probably be a little absent- minded until my exhibition is over (mid
December. Opens the 11th).
Yours
Bodvar
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:39 BST