-----Original Message-----
From: Yellow Creek's Mail <yellowck@nemr.net>
To: moq_discuss@moq.org <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Date: Monday, February 01, 1999 11:22 AM
Subject: Re: MD Evil in the MoQ.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Platt Holden <pholden5@earthlink.net>
>To: moq_discuss@moq.org <moq_discuss@moq.org>
>Date: Monday, February 01, 1999 10:28 AM
>Subject: Re: MD Evil in the MoQ.
>
>
>Hi Ken, Mary and LS:
>
>On 31 Jan. KEN wrote:
>> According to Pirsig Dynamic Quality is the driving force for change in
>> the universe. According to Mary evil is the driving force for change in
>the
>> universe. Therefore Dynamic Quality is evil. Since Static Quality opposes
>> Dynamic Quality then Static Quality is good. Dynamic Quality is the force
>> that has brought us to this stage of development and supplied all of the
>> value then Dynamic is good. Since Dynamic Qulaity and evil are
equivalent
>> then evil is good. Since morality and evil are opposites then morality is
>> bad, but, value and morality are equivalent so value is bad. Since a
thing
>> that has no value does not exist then nothing exists. Since we do not
>> exist then this argument is meaningless. Ken
>
>Congratulations Ken. You're the first on the Squad to use quantum logic.
>I'm told in the book I'm reading, "The Age of Spiritual Machines" by Ray
>Kukrzwell, that quantum logic, which thrives on paradox and absurdity, is
>now being used by computer scientists to build quantum computers that
>will eventually become conscious, replacing all of us.
>
>So you're way ahead of your time.
>
>Now, if we can just get Mary out of the basket business. :-)
>
>Platt
>
>
>
>
>MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
>Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
>
>Dear Ken,
>
>I think that in this argument you are chasing your own tail. In other
words
>the argument goes round and round with no clear answers. For some answers
>maybe "Zen" can help. In Zen dynamic quality or Zen itself is left
>undefined, and it's better this way for a couple of reasons. One you don't
>try to find infinite answers from a finite mind, and two you don't drive
>yourself crazy trying. In Zen, or DQ there is no good or bad dynamic
>quality. It's what Zen masters mean by saying KATZ to a question. Don' t
>think about good or bad, evil or nonevil. These concepts only exist in our
>consciousness or "thinking consciousness", and are not dynamic quality, but
>rather static ideas of intellecutalism. When I am at dynamic quality all
is
>one, and there is no distinctions. This is very similar to what Pirsig
>talks about in the end of his first book ZMM. He says something to the
>effect that he stared at a wall for three days, until all modes of ordinary
>static consciousness dropped away. Dynamic quality is not evil, but if
>anything just exist. It's really not good either, but good is a better way
>of describing it since it will be the motivating force of change in the
>world that produces "quality". In other words betterness of life, not
>something worse like evil would produce. If the DQ doesn't better our life
>than the attempt for change won't catch on, and it will sink back to a form
>of degeneration. Well that is my spin on the previous article, and thanks
>for your time.
>
>Jason Nelson
>nelsonjason@hotmail.com
>
>
>
>
>MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
>Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
>
MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:51 BST