From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Fri Aug 13 2004 - 19:49:54 BST
Hi Mark and all,
Vac> Mark 10-8-04: Yes, i think you are correct to say, "You use the term
Vac> "cutting pressure" to describe only coherent state..." Perhaps coherence
is a
Vac> static description of the best result Dynamic pressure can attain?
So we have now two dimensions, two scales, to describe a human. One is
STATICNESS-DYNAMICNESS (with a "sweet spot" somewhere between the
extremes) that characterizes adherence of a person to static patterns.
And another is COHERENCE-INCOHERENCE that characterizes degree of
dissociation between patterns.
I think this model is a good advance in the construction of a
new psychology.
Mark 13-8-04: Coherence - Incoherence are relationships between static
patterns. I'm glad you see this clearly Ilya. In fact, you're one of the few who
understand how important it is to get this straight because if we don't we end up
saying something about DQ, which is a big mistake. DQ is concept free.
We must be very careful; static patterns do not join together to form larger
molecules of patterns! That would be a mistake. We must be careful to remember
that coherence is a relationship between static patterns. You say,
"COHERENCE-INCOHERENCE that characterizes degree of dissociation between patterns." I
like that.
In Human terms, one aims at coherence; one may aim at maintaining coherence,
but there is no guarantee this will happen. The trick is to be open to dynamic
change while benefiting from change in a statically 'protected' coherent
relationship of patterns.
Vac> However, these leads me back to the Incoherence (chaos) - Coherence
(Mystic)
Vac> continuum. So, when you suggest "A person may be not coherent at all and
still
Vac> experience great DYNAMIC PRESSURE" perhaps this hypothetical person may
be
Vac> placed on the Incoherence/coherence continuum somewhere? Maybe towards
the
Vac> chaotic end? Perhaps very chaotic?
Vac> What is the immediate difference between the two poles of this
continuum?
Ilya:
If we have two axes (mentioned above) we have in fact four not two but
four extreme cases:
1) Very static and very coherent person;
2) very static and very incoherent person;
3) very dynamic and very coherent person;
4) very dynamic and very incoherent person.
Mark 13-8-04: Let us back up a little?
There are four evolutionary levels in the MOQ description of a person:
Inorganic.
Organic.
Social.
Intellectual.
All these levels are composed of static patterns of quality responding to DQ.
Let us take each level at once: Any particular level has a repertoire of
patterns, and within this repertoire may develop coherent relationships. So,
coherent relationships may develop in some levels but not in others?
One may reflect upon the Intellectual who exhibits coherent relationships at
the Intellectual level, but is a social misfit - that is to say, he/she is not
socially incoherent.
Let us imagine our socially incoherent intellectual just happens to be very
physically healthy and attractive? We may wish to say that he/she is
biologically coherent. So, we have:
Biological coherence.
Social Incoherence.
Intellectual coherence.
An alternative may be:
Biological Coherence.
Social Coherence.
Intellectual Incoherence.
We may change the combinations or tensions between levels; some may be
problematic, others may be exceptionally good? One thing seems clear, the oldest
level in operation, the Inorganic, has already reached such a static state it
does not enter into the equation; Protons, Electrons and the Gravitational and
Electromagnetic static patterns of Inorganic quality are not changing very much!
Ilya:
As to the dimension "STATICNESS-DYNAMICNESS", I think YOU are the
indisputable
authority :-)
Mark: This is too kind. MOQ authorities i would recommend head and shoulders
above me are Robert Pirsig, of course! Anthony McWatt, Paul Turner, and a
number of others in the forum, especially Dan Glover, who spent years working on
Lila's child. Unfortunately for those who wish to benefit from the work of the
above, they have lives to lead, work commitments and research to engage them.
Pirsig's books and articles, Anthony's papers, text book and PhD thesis, plus
Paul's posts to the forum are MOQ Gold dust Ilya. Gold dust!
Ilya:
As to the second dimension ("COHERENCE-INCOHERENCE"), it corresponds
to how whole a man is. Either he is split personality, or he is one whole, do
you see?
Mark 13-8-04: This is a new application of the MOQ. You are being creative
and this brings with it the danger of saying more than we can find helpful? One
thing i am sure of, psychology may be given a new breath of life if the MOQ is
usefully applied.
We must remember that the notion of coherence is not included in the MOQ
primary texts. It has been suggested that, in this case, it may be better to
regard any MOQ thinking which includes coherence to be an MOQ variant.
This has happened before on at least three significant occasions. I feel
there is a difference between coherence and the other three, but it may be wise to
not insist upon this.
All the best,
Mark
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 : Fri Aug 13 2004 - 19:54:39 BST