Re: MD Cybernetics and sq evolution - morality

From: David M (davidint@blueyonder.co.uk)
Date: Tue Oct 04 2005 - 19:16:59 BST

  • Next message: David M: "Re: MD The MOQ implies that there is more to reality than DQ & SQ."
  • Next message: Case: "Fw: MD Cybernetics and sq evolution - Secondary ontology as harmony."

    Hi Marsha

    The most moral thing may be the most quality
    thing one can reach. When one is a student
    one can only reach a certain amount of quality,
    as an accomplished player, built on much lesser
    quality SQ, one can reach further to attain higher
    levels of moral-quality. The possible is infinite
    but we cannot reach its peaks without building
    a platform/levels to take a deeper journey into
    what is possible. Equally, but thankfully rarely
    and with limited endurance, we can take a journey
    into the possibilities of evil and destruction.

    Regards
    David Morey

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "MarshaV" <marshalz@charter.net>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 10:40 AM
    Subject: Re: MD Cybernetics and sq evolution - morality

    > 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
    >
    >

    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 - 20:15:14 BST