Re: MD The Eudaimonic MoQ

From: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com
Date: Mon Jun 02 2003 - 21:13:27 BST

  • Next message: johnny moral: "RE: MD The Eudaimonic MoQ"

    Wouldn't Squonk agree that there are better ways to spend the night? But
    then, just getting that biological quality is not socializing either.
    Social quality is about the connection between people at a very individual
    biological level and is all about being moral and doing what is expected.
    Social quality is felt when the social experience proceeds as you expect it
    to, and you have very strong expectations that it will continue to.

    Hi,
    Yes. My point is that if DuMB had in fact been exposed to higher Quality
    intellectual intercourse then he would probably see Wilber's corpus for what it
    is? (And i feel confident he will given time and a bit of quiet reflection and a
    nice cup of hot cocoa.) The trouble with on-line discussion is that one can
    simply ignore point blank that which you don't value. The voice of the forum
    then becomes dominated by a fundamental tone, which of late has been in the key
    of Wilber flat. Face to face intellectual intercourse is not like that, for a
    sense of social well being demands a fair hearing.
    DuMB likes the sound of his own voice. Nothing unique in that. But don't you
    feel it requires an acute aesthetic sense of value to intuit when it is
    appropriate to be quiet? Otherwise, the verbal diarrhoea becomes a bit off putting?
    The MoQ may have allot to say about this very sense? That's what gave me the
    idea.
    squonk

    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 Jun 02 2003 - 21:14:08 BST