From: Monkeys' tail or (elkeaapheefteen@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Nov 06 2002 - 09:36:14 GMT
Steve, Wim, Magnus and squad,
wim:
According to me the simplest way to see things (and to correct the
carelessness of Pirsig and the internal contridications of 'Lila')
is thus: The levels are a way of distinguishing the different types of
static quality by their different amounts of Dynamic Quality.
magnus:
To confuse things even more for poor Steve, my way of distinguishing
the levels is quite opposite from Wim's. The first split is always
the DQ/SQ remember? So, there is no DQ *in* a static level.
Sometimes they can be hard to distinguish from eachother, but try
and you will be rewarded with a better understanding.
Davor:
I agree with Magnus, static levels do not contain dq and for that matter are
not distinguishable in this way. What maybe would be another suggestion is
that the receptiveness to change(or receptiveness to DQ) is the measurer of
quality and the levels are to be distinct in their ability to change. What
confuses me a little is that some intellectual patterns(can I still call the
fourth level Intelectual?) seem more static then some for instance social
patterns. The static patterns are static because they proofed themselves to
be of high quality, so the longer a static pattern of value seem to last the
higher the quality is. This creates a huge contradiction in my understanding
of the Moq, the contradiction between how the receptiveness to change
relates to the unreceptiveness of some high quality static patterns. The
quality of a pattern is thus determined by the time it lasts which in is
determined by the pragmatic <usability>.
Maybe this is a step in the right direction:
The vulnerability of the higher quality patterns is far greater then the
lower level patterns because of this same receptiveness, and are therefore
under much more pressure then the lower level patterns. This pressure, these
attacks from the lower levels and dq which are at any moment able to
penetrate or poison the higher levels result in something that is far more
capable of dealing with circumstantial change then a lower level pattern.
Much like how a diamond comes to be.
Not totally satisfying for me yet, have to check our moral bible, maybe
anyone care to help me out?
Davor
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
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 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 06 2002 - 09:37:38 GMT