From: David M (davidint@blueyonder.co.uk)
Date: Thu Nov 10 2005 - 17:57:30 GMT
Case
> [Case]
> Or at least helps to establish relationships among competeing aspects of
> Quality. Give me and example of "somethings can
> have very high value or equal value but have very different qualities."
DM: A tiger versus a poem about a tiger
>
> [David M]
> Also, how does DQ relate to SQ.
>
> [Case]
> They are both aspects of Quality.
DM: I would hope we could put more flesh on it than that.
>
> [David M]
> Is the cosmos not teeming with SQ, bursting forth with new SQ, is this
> abundance and creativity not what
> DQleaves in its trail?
>
> [Case]
> It is what Quality leaves in its trail. It leaves somethings stationary
> and
> somethings wiggling. Give me an example of anything that is purely static.
>
DM: I agree there are none.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rebecca Temmer <mailto:ratemmer.lists@gmail.com>
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 9:32 PM
> Subject: Re: MD A Question of Balance / Rules of the Game
>
> 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
>
>
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 : Thu Nov 10 2005 - 18:22:11 GMT