From: Charles Roghair (ctr@pacificpartssales.com)
Date: Sun Oct 10 2004 - 16:43:01 BST
David:
Yes, it is very hard to see past all the SQ. If it weren't so hard, I
don't think there would be any need for this discussion, or the MoQ for
that matter.
For example, the fact that all this transpires via email is another
level of static to be navigated. There is no voice inflection; there
are no body language cues; there is no immediate qualification of
present misunderstanding, etc.
Despite all that, ideas flow and people grow (at least I do) to some
extent. After all, an existing, evolving MoQ is better than no MoQ, I
think.
Communication as we know it, I'm afraid, has been given a life sentence
behind the bars of SQ without the possibility of parole, but it's all
we've got.
I'm a big fan of words. I've given this a lot of thought, but I just
don't see any hope for language ever sprouting legs to crawl from the
SQ muck.
I'm hoping someone will prove me wrong.
Best regards,
Chuck
On Oct 10, 2004, at 7:11 AM, David Morey wrote:
> see correction below
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Morey" <us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk>
> To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 8:15 PM
> Subject: Re: MD A bit of reasoning
>
>
>> well, it's very hard to see past all the SQ is it not?
>>
>>
>> DM
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Charles Roghair" <ctr@pacificpartssales.com>
>> To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 1:31 AM
>> Subject: Re: MD A bit of reasoning
>>
>>
>>> But isn't that the whole point?
>>>
>>> By the time these experiences and/or ideas are expressed in words or
>>> any other form of communication, they are, in effect, SQ!
>>>
>>> The Tao that can be expressed in words is not the true Tao.
>>>
>>> Or something to that effect.
>>>
>>> Wave on!
>>>
>>> Chuck
>>>
>>> On Oct 8, 2004, at 1:07 PM, David Morey wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree here with Scott, if you could understand
>>>> the relationship between SQ and DQ in language
>>>> you could probably apply this to the whole cosmos.
>>>> What we think of as experience is entirely artefacts/signs
>>>> as invented and used to make patterns of all the flux of
>>>> infleunces acting on our bodies from the outside.
>>>>
>>>> DM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Scott Roberts" <jse885@earthlink.net>
>>>> To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
>>>> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 6:19 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: MD A bit of reasoning
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Mel,
>>>>>
>>>>> [Skipping a great deal, but I've fallen too far behind, so I just
>>>>> want to
>>>>> mention...]
>>>>>
>>>>>> mel:
>>>>>> To discuss MoQ in language will trap us in SOM.
>>>>>> To look for MoQ outside of language makes it
>>>>>> incompatible with a pholosophical approach.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think there is an answer to this dilemma in ceasing to look on
>>>>> language
>>>>> as just a tool (which I consider a SOM limitation) and concentrate
>>>>> on
>>>>> language itself. Not in what it describes, nor studying its syntax,
>>>>> semantics, and pragmatics (not that that is uninteresting), but
>>>>> looking
>>>>> into its conditions of possibility, and seeing it as a microcosm of
>>>>> the
>>>>> macrocosm.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh yes, a reference for the logic of contradictory identity: The
>>>>> Nothingness Beyond God: An Introduction to the Philosophy of
>>>>> Nishida
>>>>> Kitaro, by Robert E. Carter.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Scott
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> 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 : Sun Oct 10 2004 - 17:02:03 BST