From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Thu Sep 25 2003 - 11:44:08 BST
Paul and People.
It reminds me of an instance when Struan Hellier roamed these
forums, his aim was to prove the MOQ to be "subjective". I had been
on to the same ZMM part where P. is confronted with the SOM
"horns" dilemma and makes short thrift of the objective one, but
dwells longer on the subjective one. As I see it he sort of declares
EVERYTHING to be subjective in a much wider sense than the S/O
one, in more of a "Buddhistic" sense. i.e: that the QUALITY he talked
of was another name for this fundamental - um - Eastern subjectivity.
Struan was of course not prepared to go into - or understand - these
subtleties and triumphed: Finally I had admitted that the MOQ was
subjective! So when you throw up your hands in exasperation ((24
Sep.) after I had said:
Bo:
> > Intellect an aspect of mind?! But as Q-intellect is a static aspect of > > DQ, it means that MIND = DQ and THAT one I buy!
> Paul:
> Dynamic Quality is mind? Is that really how you see it Bo? And you
> were dismayed by Pirsig's "mysterious idealist stance".
...I can only regret having been so stupid - again - as to raise this
point! But I had thought that YOU would understand the enormous
difference between an opening like (for example): Reality=Mind and
then Dynamic/Static Mind .... and that of introducing "mind" as a
level in the STATIC sequence.
Glad you haven't gone lurking Paul. Look out for my "solution" post
that is almost ready. I'm very interested in your reaction to it.
Sincerely
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 : Thu Sep 25 2003 - 11:45:52 BST