From: johnny moral (johnnymoral@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Aug 10 2004 - 00:20:55 BST
Ilya:
>>Now. If a person experiences little DYNAMIC PRESSURE, he is dominated
>>completely by static patterns. His life is tepid and measured. He may be
>>more or less harmonious depending on how coherent his static pattern
>>levels are, but he has comparatively little chances to become either
>>mental hospital patient or great spiritual leader. He is ordinary very
>>small detail in the body of the Giant.
I like this idea, because it shows that DQ is better understood as pressure
on static patterns by other static patterns. That person may read a book
tomorrow (because someone gave it to him because it had a cover that had a
picture of his favorite car - ie, a seemingly random reason but not without
reason) that will put dynamic pressure on him to change his life, and he
will change his life.
I don't know why Chuck wants to bring in awareness, or why there is such a
strong need to rank people as being better or smarter or more aware or
dynamic. OK, people are different in all those ways, but that's entirely
because of the dynamically-pressured static patterns that they live in, and
those differences may change. I don't think a person needs to be aware of
the dynamic presssures around him for dynamic change to take place.
Johnny
>From: Charles Roghair <ctr@pacificpartssales.com>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>Subject: Re: MD DYNAMIC PRESSURE (?)
>Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 14:49:39 -0700
>
>Hello everybody. Hello Ilya.
>
>Ilya, your new term, DYNAMIC PRESSURE, sounds like AWARENESS to me.
>
>AWARENESS ¨C n 1: having knowledge of; 2: state of elementary or
>undifferentiated consciousness
>
>Read:
>
>>AWARENESS is experienced by person drive from static patters of his life
>>toward unknown. Experienced by person force that drives him toward he does
>>know what, you understand, Mark?
>>
>>If we use this new term, we don't have to define "AWARENESS" and explain
>>what means saying that one person is more aware than another. We may just
>>say that a person A experiences much more AWARENESS than a person B. Or,
>>that a person A experiences much more AWARENESS at the moment of time t1
>>than he experienced at the moment of time t2.
>>
>>Now. If a person experiences little AWARENESS, he is dominated completely
>>by static patterns. His life is tepid and measured. He may be more or less
>>harmonious depending on how coherent his static pattern levels are, but he
>>has comparatively little chances to become either mental hospital patient
>>or great spiritual leader. He is ordinary very small detail in the body of
>>the Giant.
>>
>>If a person experiences great AWARENESS, there are two possibilities. If
>>this person's static pattern levels are very coherent, his life is a
>>mistic experience of a great intensity. Example of such a person - Jesus
>>Christ.
>>If this person's static pattern levels are NOT coherent at all, it's hard
>>to envy him. His life is complete nighmare. He is being torn apart by he
>>doesn't understand what. In such a state some people seek rescue at
>>psychoanalysts, some in religion, some in alcohol and drugs. Some may
>>clench teeth tight and cling to whatever static patterns they had (and
>>thus shut themselves from any possibility for growth). Some may stubbornly
>>seek for Truth, Reason (or whatever they would call it) and eventually
>>invent something like MOQ :-
>>
>
>As I was enjoy your thoughts on DYNAMIC PRESSURE, I noticed I was
>simultaneously aware of AWARENOUS.
>
>Thoughts?
>
>Best regards,
>
>Chuck
>
>
>On Aug 7, 2004, at 12:51 PM, §ª§Ý§î§ñ §¬§à§â§à§Ò§Ü§à§Ó wrote:
>
>>Hi Mark,
>>
>>
>>Vac>> 1. Can we say that person A is more Dynamic then person B?
>>Vac>> Mark 4-8-04: This can be qualified because a 'person' is given quite
>>a
>>Vac>> detailed description in the MOQ: A person is dominated by a
>>combination of four
>>Vac>> levels of evolutionary related static patterns, Inorganic, Organic,
>>Social and
>>Vac>> Intellectual, and these levels are responding to DQ at the same
>>time.
>>
>>
>>You know, Mark, something troubles me in this description. It sounds too
>>"objective" to me, that is, too far from what a certain human being
>>(whatever his metaphysical status is) experiences. Maybe this description
>>is all right as long as only phylosophy is concerned, but I feel it is not
>>very convenient for psychology.
>>
>>I invented a new term today, DYNAMIC PRESSURE, and want to present it it
>>to you and ask what you think about it.
>>
>>DYNAMIC PRESSURE is experienced by person drive from static patters of his
>>life toward unknown. Experienced by person force that drives him toward he
>>does know what, you understand, Mark?
>>
>>If we use this new term, we don't have to define "DYNAMICNESS" and explain
>>what means saying that one person is more Dynamic than another. We may
>>just say that a person A experiences much more DYNAMIC PRESSURE than a
>>person B. Or, that a person A experiences much more DYNAMIC PRESSURE at
>>the moment of time t1 than he experienced at the moment of time t2.
>>
>>Now. If a person experiences little DYNAMIC PRESSURE, he is dominated
>>completely by static patterns. His life is tepid and measured. He may be
>>more or less harmonious depending on how coherent his static pattern
>>levels are, but he has comparatively little chances to become either
>>mental hospital patient or great spiritual leader. He is ordinary very
>>small detail in the body of the Giant.
>>
>>If a person experiences great DYNAMIC PRESSURE, there are two
>>possibilities. If this person's static pattern levels are very coherent,
>>his life is a mistic experience of a great intensity. Example of such a
>>person - Jesus Christ.
>>If this person's static pattern levels are NOT coherent at all, it's hard
>>to envy him. His life is complete nighmare. He is being torn apart by he
>>doesn't understand what. In such a state some people seek rescue at
>>psychoanalysts, some in religion, some in alcohol and drugs. Some may
>>clench teeth tight and cling to whatever static patterns they had (and
>>thus shut themselves from any possibility for growth). Some may stubbornly
>>seek for Truth, Reason (or whatever they would call it) and eventually
>>invent something like MOQ :-)
>>
>>
>>Well, that's what I wanted to tell you and ask your opinion about, Mark.
>>If you tell me how this description fits with the MOQ theory and what you
>>personally think about it, I would be very grateful.
>>
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Ilya
>>
>>
>>
>>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
>>
_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now!
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
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 : Tue Aug 10 2004 - 00:34:27 BST