From: David Morey (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Mon Aug 09 2004 - 20:53:31 BST
Hi Charles
We have talked of Heidegger in the past.
I for one think there is much common ground
between Heidegger and Pirsig.
regards
David M
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Roghair" <ctr@pacificpartssales.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 11:45 PM
Subject: Re: MD MOQ psycology (?)
> Hello everybody,
>
> Would Heidegger's "Being and Time" be of any help here? If your
> talking about "just about everything in life, the universe and
> everything, " well that sounds to me a lot like ontology.
>
> Heidegger asks, "what does everything have in common?"
>
> His answer is "Being." "Being," therefore, must be the most universal
> of concepts. While everyone has an innate, a priori knowledge of
> being, a working definition remains elusive – our understanding, vague
> and difficult to describe.
>
> Because being is permanent flux? Hyper Dynamic? Of highest Quality?
>
> Best regards,
>
> C.
>
> On Aug 8, 2004, at 2:01 PM, David Morey wrote:
>
> > Hi DMB
> >
> > Ever read Marcuse's One Dimensional Man? -
> > good discussion in it on the political conformity
> > of science. Quality has more to offer
> > then instrumentalism.
> >
> > regards
> > David M
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David Buchanan" <DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org>
> > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 8:46 PM
> > Subject: RE: MD MOQ psycology (?)
> >
> >
> >> Ilya and Ian:
> >>
> >> Ian Glendinning said:
> >> My catch-all term for describing just about everything
> >> in life, the universe and everything, MoQ included,
> >> is "Evolutionary Psychology".
> >>
> >> dmb says:
> >> This reminds me of an author that Ilya might want to investation, the
> >> evolutionary psychologist Ken Wilber. I don't think its exactly right
> >> to
> > say
> >> his work is based on the MOQ's assumptions, but his work and Pirsig's
> >> are
> >> both based on the same assumtions.
> >>
> >> Ian said:
> >> The word "scientific" fills me with dread in the proposal here.
> >> Does everything still need to be "scientific" (ie politically correct)
> >> to be taken seriously these days ?
> >>
> >> dmb says:
> >> Huh? How do you figure? What is dreadful about the word "scientific"?
> >> How
> > do
> >> you figure the word has anything to do with being politically
> >> correct? I'm
> >> sorry Ian, but this doesn't make any sense.
> >>
> >> On second thought, never mind. Don't bother trying to explain.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> dmb
> >>
> >>
> >> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> >> Mail Archives:
> >> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> >> Nov '02 Onward -
> > http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> >> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> >> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> > Mail Archives:
> > Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> > Nov '02 Onward -
> > http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
> >
> > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
> >
>
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward -
http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 Aug 09 2004 - 21:56:22 BST