Re: MD Cybernetics and sq evolution - morality

From: MarshaV (marshalz@charter.net)
Date: Tue Oct 04 2005 - 10:40:13 BST

  • Next message: platootje@netscape.net: "Re: MD The intelligence fallacy (was Rhetoric)"

    At 12:46 PM 10/3/2005, you wrote:
    >Mark:
    >In my Cybernetics and harmony thread i'm making a fine
    >distinction between playing a violin and playing it
    >bloody well! I'm suggesting, and it's just a
    >suggestion, that the violin and player are in some
    >sense primary sq patterns, but the performance, the
    >excellent relationships which contribute to the
    >performance are in some sense secondary and more
    >moral.

    Hi Mark,

    Sorry to keep this going, but...

    When I was in high school, I wanted to play the guitar. After a few
    lessons, I heard myself playing 'Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star' badly,
    and stopped. Later I married a man who played classical guitar. He
    decided to learn Bach's Cello Suite No. 1. I heard many months of
    playing that Bach piece which might have been labeled bad. Was
    it? Or was there only playing the guitar? I think that from the
    first notes of learning to the sharing through performance all was quality.

    Or if one could zoom out to the edge of known space and look back at
    ourselves, would our morality be meaningful? Or if one could
    experience ourselves from the quantum point-of-view, would our
    morality be meaningful? I think quality is in the moment, not in the
    judgements.

    I think there are no answers, but I still struggle with the questions.

    Marsha

    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 Oct 04 2005 - 11:25:55 BST