Re: MD levels (Relativity)

From: Valence (valence10@hotmail.com)
Date: Sat Nov 09 2002 - 21:53:07 GMT

  • Next message: Wim Nusselder: "Re: MD levels (Down with Types of Patterns, Up with Types of Value)"

    Hey Peter, Platt, Steve and all,

    Here it is, right from the horse's mouth....

    PIRSIG (ZMM chap. 20 p.224)
        He then proceeded in terms ofthe trinity to answer the question, Why does everybody see Quality differently? This was the question he had always had to answer speciously before. Now he said, "Quaity is shapeless, form-less, indescribable. To see shapes and forms is to intellectualize. Quality is independent of any such shapes and forms. The names, the shapes and forms we give Quality depend only partly on the Quality. They also depend partly on the *a priori* images we have accumulated in our memory. We constantly see to find, in the Quality event, analogues to our previous experiences. If we didn't we'd beunable to act. We build up our language in terms of these analogues. We buildup our whole culture in terms of these analogues."
        The reason people see Quality differently, he said, is because the come to it with different sets of analogues....

    just helping out a bit,
    rick

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Peterfabriani@aol.com
      To: moq_discuss@moq.org
      Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 4:09 PM
      Subject: Re: MD levels (Relativity)

      Platt and all,

      What is the resolution in ZAMM of the issue of why different papers get
      different grades when graded by different professors?

      Peter: Profs. Grade up those papers that agree with their own patterns of value. You notice that which you value from the background aesthetic continuum.

      How is this relative evaluation reconciled with absolute good in the moq?

      Peter: The absolute is not defined; it is absolute in that is IS.

      Are some of the professors simply wrong while another is right about the paper's worth?

      Peter: Rhetoric is the static representation of spoken language. Spoken language is capable of dynamic interaction. Not speaking at all and being with the All is better still. There is no such thing as wrong or right - there is better and worse. Therefore, some papers are better than others and that can be recognised by a sophisticated evolved pattern of values that just happens to be a Human being with a history of experiences of its own.

      Or does each professor have a different experience of the same paper?

      Peter: Yes.

      Steve

    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 : Sat Nov 09 2002 - 21:53:01 GMT