RE: MD 10 statements: (for Wim on the degeneracy issue)

From: Monkeys' tail or (elkeaapheefteen@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Dec 02 2002 - 10:10:57 GMT

  • Next message: Elizaphanian: "Re: MD Huxley says:"

    Hi Erin,

    ERIN: Just wanted to point out my horoscope last week
    was about this degenerate tree.
    When an old tree in the rain forest dies and topples over, it takes a long
    time to decompose. As it does, it becomes host to new saplings that use the
    decaying log for nourishment. I'd like you to picture yourself, Scorpio,
    sitting in the forest gazing upon this scene. How would you describe it?
    Would you dwell in grizzly detail on the putrefaction of the fallen tree
    while ignoring the fresh life sprouting out of it? If you did, you'd be
    imitating the spirit of modern journalists. Or, instead, would you be a
    balanced witness, reporting on the decay and growth with equal emphasis? In
    the weeks to come, please be the latter.

    >Okay I have to admit I didn't really feel the
    >overdoing the dynamic thread was settled in my mind despite
    >its conclusions. I think you could have a
    >conclusion that allows for paradox like the above horoscope
    >or the one that doesn't as in the thread.
    >I haven't gone back and reread it though so I should probably
    >being doing that before talking about it.

    Well, it seems you already comprehended the fundamental problem of the
    degeneracy issue, every(not sure about every but cannot come up with an
    example at least) form of degeneracy can eventually be viewed in terms of
    circularity, just as every form of destruction is actually restructuring,
    making it part of DQ so to say. Your example of the tree shows it is
    depending on your perspective, not very MOQish imo but not much to do about
    it either. I would be happy if you would re-read the overdoing the dynamic
    discussion because I think it is a part of the fundament of the MOQ, and a
    pretty important part too though not many people seem to agree or see a
    problem at all here.

    >I also wanted to give an example of degeneracy that
    >I was moved by when I read about it. I imagine it
    >is even more moving experiencing it.
    >Reading how these beautiful intricate sand mandalas were
    >carefully created to then be destroyed really gets at
    >how degeneracy is part of the cycle that i would
    >consider DQ. Art seems typically associated with 'creation' but these
    >sand mandalas have this delicate art which involves
    >creation and destruction.Beautiful.
    >
    >SAND MANDALAS: Having constructed the the-pu or mandala base, the artists
    >measure out and draw the architectural lines using a straight-edge
    >ruler,compass and white ink pen. The mandala is a formal geometric pattern
    >of a ground plan of a sacred mansions. It includes a foundation, four
    >entrances,wall and other architectural elements. The colour sand is applied
    >to the mandala through the end of a metal funnel, which is rasped with
    >another funnel in order to release a fine stream of sand.The artists begin
    >at the centre of the mandala and work outward. As the mandala is made in
    >the spirit of impermanence and non-attachement, it will eventually be
    >ritualistically dismantled and the blessed sand carried to the river, where
    >it will be offered for the benefit of the marine life and the environment.

    I am not sure wether it is the same but I think I have an example that boils
    down to the same thing. A few weeks ago I saw I believe it was a documentary
    of people who were building all kinds of stuff in the desert. Among the
    objects that were built were some beautiful things, like a big, and I really
    mean big ship, and all kinds of other things. But the goal of the whole
    event was not to display the objects but to destroy them, burn everything to
    the ground, it was for some competitors therapeutic to burn their own
    creations. It gave them a sort of satisfaction that a project was fully
    finished with nothing left behind.

    But, as every example this one also can be veiwed in terms of DQ. I am
    really getting more and more frustrated with this whole thing. It is maybe a
    bit like William James his famous essay; does consiousness exist? Does
    degeneracy exist? It would start of like this;

    <Degeneracy and DQ are the names for two sorts of object, that common sense
    will always find contrasting, and will always practically oppose to each
    other.>

    We all know where the essay ends up, I am wondering where this is going to
    end. I hope one day I will understand this degeneracy thing, maybe it has
    something to do with <eternal cycles> and all that, I am going to the
    mountains in a few weeks maybe I can fuse a great insight of Nietzschian
    proportions concerning this, or maybe I do not need insight but just need to
    see the rock I am tripping over. So big and yet so little...

    cheers, davor

    _________________________________________________________________
    Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
    http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

    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 : Mon Dec 02 2002 - 10:11:22 GMT