From: Rebecca Temmer (ratemmer.lists@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Nov 07 2005 - 21:32:45 GMT
Hey Case,
You wrote:
I have argued repeatedly that having a multiple undefined terms is folly. So
> I will present as nearly as possible in sound bites, the main terms of the
> MoQ as they seem Good to me.
>
> Quality - Undefined - the Tao. When apprended in its purest form it
> reflects
> the union or balance between opposites. It is the monism from which all
> dualisms spring. As Lao Tsu put it: "When named it is the mother of all
> things." Perceptually it is harmony or balance. To pursue it is to follow
> The Way of Virtue. It is undefined not for mystical or esthetic reason but
> for practical reasons. It is 'reality' and 'reality' is unknowable as
> Heisenburg, Godel, Wilson, Hume, Kant, and just about anyone who thinks
> about much can testify. Our apprehension of Quality is limited by our very
> nature.
>
> Value - Is the quantification of Quality. The hot stove is Low Quality or
> better yet Negative Quality. It repels us. But consider for a moment a
> merely warm stove. It may not be so hot as to burn you. It may be the only
> place in the room to sit. If it is turned on and the temperature is
> increasing, this increase can be measured and assigned a numerical value.
> You can even take note of which specific Values individuals find to hot to
> handle. Value is undervalued in these MoQ discussions. Values can be
> assigned to dualistic opposites in many ways. We like or dislike things
> esthetically. We give it a thumbs up or thumbs down. Or we like it a lot
> and
> give it 4 stars. Or Values can be specified with increasing precision
> leading to math and physics which are all about the relationships and
> interaction of Values. The point being that in the MoQ both physics and
> art
> are all about the interplay of Values.
>
> Dynamic - A much abused term in these discussions. It's meaning seems to
> range from the undefined to the mystical to the intellect to the warm
> fuzziness of the ineffablly groovy. Mostly it seems to be redundantly
> identified with Quality itself. Pirsig himself contributes to this
> confusion. The term has extraordinary Value when taken a face Value. That
> is
>
> Dynamic means change, flux, motion. From the wave property of matter to
> the
> a priori concept of time to the paradigm shift in ideas; the dynamic can
> be
> assigned Value from positive and negative to specific quantification of
> rate
> of change.
>
> Static - The opposite of dynamic as any dualistic pole should be. Static
> means stable, fixed, orderly.
I would love to go on and on about how useful this version of MoQ is but I
> have thus far been unable to get anyone to even say that it is bad or
> misguided. I do not find this formulation to be at odds with what Pirsig
> says. I also think it cuts through many of the arguments going on here and
> paves the way for intergration of the MoQ into a broad range of subjects
> from evolution to theology.
>
Rebecca replies:
So, I'll agree with you on pretty much the entire thing.
That's what the terms static (not moving) and dynamic (moving) mean.
If you would hop over to the thread I started on the Holy Trinity, on which
I will post a response to DMB's question perhaps we could continue this
conversation. :)
Looking forward to your response...
Rebecca
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 : Mon Nov 07 2005 - 22:37:15 GMT