From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Tue Aug 17 2004 - 15:19:43 BST
Hi Mark. Hello all.
Some time ago I wrote:
> 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 would put things the other way now. Instead of placing a person
somewhere on the STATICNESS-DYNAMICNESS scale, I would rather
characterize him now as being more or less OPEN TO DYNAMIC QUALITY.
(It is a way of description Wim Nusselder had suggested.)
Mark 17-8-04: Hi Ilya, I feel Wim has confused you. You see, if one accepts
what coherence is trying to say, that coherence is, 'freedom from static
patterns, within static patterns' then a coherent person IS more open to DQ in a
healthy sense. An Incoherent person is open to DQ but the result is chaotic and
pathological. Does this make any sense?
Being open
to DQ means experiencing that your static patterns (or, more corretly,
"static patterns you are composed of") do not adequately reflect DQ.
Consequences of being open to DQ depend on how strongly you cling to
your static patterns. If you cling to them deadly strong it produces
very high DYNAMIC PRESSURE which can make your life insufferable.
But you have very strong, rigid "self", ego.
Mark 17-8-04: This is very interesting ilya. I feel this is very important
and i am so happy to see you using the MOQ this way.
If, on the contrary, you do not cling to static patterns at all, you
experience no dynamic pressure at all - you just "swim with the
current". BUT YOU ARE NOBODY, you have no self! "Nobody home", as Lila
said.
Mark 17-8-04: Well, now, can you see how coherence may be brought to bare at
this point? Coherence is a healthy openness to DQ, Incoherence is a
pathological openness to DQ. Pirsig suggests towards to end of Lila that what Lila needs
is ritual in her life - static patterns within which to find protecting
structure for Dynamic pressure?
However, the Buddha abandoned any illusion of ego but remained coherent. The
phrase "swim with the current" is what coherence is saying, but in strict MOQ
terms.
Is the latter possibility good? Is it of value? I think not. As well
as the former. It seems we should seek for some "sweet spot" between the
extremes.
Mark 17-8-04: It makes great sense to me if we keep coherence to hand. I
think Wim has unintentionally muddied the water. The sweet spot is healthy,
coherent openness to DQ. Incoherence is chaotic, pathological openness to DQ.
Vac> Mark 13-8-04: Let us back up a little?
Vac> There are four evolutionary levels in the MOQ description of a person:
...
Vac> All these levels are composed of static patterns of quality responding
to DQ.
Vac> Let us take each level at once: Any particular level has a repertoire of
Vac> patterns, and within this repertoire may develop coherent relationships.
So,
Vac> coherent relationships may develop in some levels but not in others?
Yes, Mark, I agree. We may speek about coherent relationships within
certain level and may speek about coherent relationships between some
levels, right?
Best regards,
Ilya
Mark 17-8-04: It's looking good Ilya! You are the psychologist trying to use
the MOQ, and it may be making some sense. There is work to do, and i shall try
to help if i can.
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 : Tue Aug 17 2004 - 17:10:33 BST