Re: MD Re: MOQ:What is a person.

From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Wed Oct 08 2003 - 19:49:43 BST

  • Next message: David MOREY: "Re: MD Intellectual level - New letter from Pirsig"

    Patrick

    I follow your reasoning, but how does DQ and SQ
    connect with time? I am of the view that DQ is with
    us every moment, that any movement through time
    is either DQ or SQ and quite a lot of it has to be
    DQ, every second you encounter new things or people.
    Sure you can treat a flower as another example of flower X
    but also it is a particular/unique flower in some way, like
    we all have unique faces (such a big sign of what it is to be
    a human INDIVIDUAL), and we can respond in a unique
    DQ way. As a romantic poet I might be in a state of permanent
    DQ response. For me DQ is not super-mystery precious, it is
    under our noses every day. But we fear and flee its open/void
    nature and too often seek SQ/determined/secure comfort.
    What do you say?

    regards
    David Morey

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Patrick van den Berg" <cirandar@yahoo.com>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 12:59 PM
    Subject: Re: MD Re: MOQ:What is a person.

    > Hi David H,
    >
    > > To me apprehend does not imply 'communication' as it is not a two-way
    > > street.
    > >
    > > When DQ is really
    > > > primary, we are not the static patterns that 'respond' to DQ (that
    > > > leaves DQ out of who we really are)
    > >
    > > Respond also implies that 'communication' is taking place which to me
    > > isn't
    > > correct.
    > >
    >
    > > Our identity does not 'contain' DQ our 'identity' is our patterns
    > > which are
    > > capable of apprehending Dynamic Quality.
    >
    > My dictionary gives these words under 'apprehend': comprehend,
    > understand, get, grasp, make out, perceive, take in.
    > So a person is a set of patterns that can 'take in', 'grasp' etc.
    > dynamic quality. Well, okay, I can agree with this definition, but then
    > I want to make a distinction between 'person' or 'self' and 'higher
    > self'. A person is a self, an individual, a personality with certain
    > characteristics, or static quality-patterns. Our higher self has at its
    > root both static and dynamic quality. The self is limited to its own
    > static patterns, and can only apprehend DQ as something that is
    > not-self. By using a concept as 'higher self', you can say that our real
    > identity, or who or what we really are, is beyond a self that can
    > apprehend or 'take in' DQ, which in this definition is not-self (to me).
    > But 'higher self' might include both static and dynamic quality. If DQ
    > (with sqs) is the ground of reality (you might say), than the word
    > 'self' in 'higher self' acknowledges that the ground of reality is the
    > ground of our being (and is not external to this).
    >
    > Can you agree with these definitions?
    >
    > Greetings, Patrick.
    >
    >
    > __________________________________
    > Do you Yahoo!?
    > The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
    > http://shopping.yahoo.com
    >
    >
    > 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 : Wed Oct 08 2003 - 20:43:34 BST