Re: MD Where does quality reside?

From: Joseph Maurer (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Sat Oct 30 2004 - 20:30:56 BST

  • Next message: Mark Steven Heyman: "Re: MD Where does quality reside?"

    On 29 October 2004 9:01 AM Erin writes:

    [Erin] I was wondering if people answer this in the context of the analogy that was given earlier about Pirsig's point is that we have another sense for quality/value. I am not sure if I understand that. Senses are separating information, so the light- vision, sound- hearing, etc. so if you make the value-Quality sense, it seems like you are doing a split that you shouldn't be doing if value really is the "groundstuff".

    Hi Erin and all,

    Welcome back!

    [joe] evolution produces three levels from one level! Is this possible? In terms of evolution Awareness is 0! Is this possible? All men are created equal! Is this possible?

    [joe] a sentient has three brains, a way to experience the level of origin. Mystical brains, not separating information but connecting to its proper level. All men are created equal.

    [joe] the new individual composed of three levels of experience creates an awareness and can create new configurations in awareness from the three levels. Awareness is 0!

    [joe] matter is composed of three forces which in certain circumstances can be separated from matter. Evolution produces three levels from one level!

    [joe] what is the value of quanta, string, membrane, multiple universe discoveries? I have no idea!

    [joe] all this is dogma! Is it based in experience? Mystical experience is not subjective in the sense of subjective/objective metaphysical division. The source of the dogma: Pirsig, Gurdjieff, Joseph Campbell, Peter Maurin, Dorothy Day, a lady. I am not creative, I merely repeat what I have heard or read.

    Joe

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Erin
      To: moq_discuss@moq.org
      Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 6:45 AM
      Subject: Re: MD Where does quality reside?

      I was wondering if people answer this in the context of the analogy that was given earlier about Pirsig's point is that we have another sense for quality/value. I am not sure if I understand that. Senses are separating information, so the light- vision, sound- hearing, etc. so if you make the value-Quality sense, it seems like you are doing a split that you shouldn't be doing if value really is the "groundstuff".

      Erin

      Platt Holden <pholden@sc.rr.com> wrote:

    > msh says:
    > Why do people sometimes disagree about the
    > objects in which Quality resides?

        Quality resides in objects? Or in the "eye of the beholder?" I think
        Pirsig addresses this perennial question, but I can't find where. Anyone
        know where he gives a definitive answer? Perhaps Quality "resides" in both
        subject and object? If so, what's the relationship?

        Thanks.

        Platt

        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 : Sat Oct 30 2004 - 20:31:55 BST