From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Tue Sep 02 2003 - 08:50:52 BST
Dear Paul
I will try to do some summarizing this time. All we discuss is contained
in the below paragraph from this message:
> > Paul:
> > "Dynamic Quality" is supposed to refer to experience beyond thought,
> > you think the MOQ, a metaphysics, a structure of thought, an
> > intellectual pattern, "contains" Dynamic Quality.
I know because I have been through it before with a(nother) very
bright guy - Denis Poisson. We kept a similar thread going a couple of
years ago. The starting point was about the MOQ as a intellectual
pattern and the container problem which we also have discussed and
is related to the one above.
I can't recall where it ended, but Denis finally dropped out. I'm not
saying that I "won" or anything like that (his military service was due).
Faintly I think it ended with a comparison between the MOQ/DQ and
Christendom/God ...what Richard and I also jammed ourselves firmly
into BTW ... perhaps what made him drop out too - by the bye!
I sensed a similar "exhaustion" with you in this from the 29th.
> Metaphysics does not contain Quality, Quality contains metaphysics.
> My head hurts, fundamentally :-)
> Paul
The point of this long introduction is that I am a tired of you appearing
as if I don't understand, your "sermons" are wasted, I am completely
devoted to the MOQ, and to Pirsig for his pioneer job, but can't sweep
the inconsistencies under the rug. This my effort results in the levels
as "self-contained" realities, keepers of the mirror by which reality is
seen. Thus the MOQ (with its DQ/SQ aggregate) is a budding
5th.level of its own system, necessarily a rebel of the 4th. - intellect!
I know only too well the argument that the DQ is beyond everything,
but it IS part of the MOQ in the same sense that God is part of
Christendom and Allah is of Islam. "Ecumenism" I can't discuss here,
but I see the SOL doing away with the container logic specter and
that is a relief. Momentarily at least because Steve pointed to the
difficulties a Q-level creates, but IMO also there the SOL interpretation
saves the MOQ.
Look. In your view the MOQ is a high intellectual pattern, no? Now, a
development inside intellect is plainly impossible because it would
degrade the MOQ by pushing it down on the "idea" scale. And that
must be considered, intellect isn't closed in your view, no? Worse is a
development beyond intellect (still in you view) which would consider
the MOQ an "evil".
I have taken the consequences of this and closed intellect by making
it the S/O VALUE! and the MOQ the movement beyond. Admittedly,
this also closes the circle, but at a higher level (there can't be any
6th) but it solves the ills of the present intellect where the S/O divide
alternates between being a bad idea and a great value (look to Scott's
work).
Sincerely as always.
Bo
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 Sep 02 2003 - 09:00:54 BST