Re: MD Awareness and Quality

From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Sat Jan 31 2004 - 20:32:43 GMT

  • Next message: MrTomMorgan@aol.com: "Re: MD Sensory Deprived theory"

    Hi Steve,
    Thanks for reading TEOC.
    I shall try to help you see were it is coming from.

    Questions:

    How is ZAMM's Quality as pre-intellectual awareness related to Lila's
    Dynamic Quality leaving static patterns in its wake?

    Mark: 31-01-04: Harmony and beauty. A severe coherence between Intellectual
    patterns.

    Are they the same? Is Pirsig using the term "intellectual" in the same
    sense as he does when he discusses intellectual patterns?

    Mark: 31-01-04: At the sweet spot of nothingness, that point where tension
    between patterns is very severe - the cutting edge of reality - is the point
    from which new patterns emerge falling away from coherence, becoming static.
    Pre-intellectual is harmonic coherence - intellectual is the static
    conception. You already all this Steve. I know you do. But you don't just quite see
    what TEOC is saying yet?

    Perhaps "unpatterned awareness" would make a good substitute for
    "pre-intellectual awareness," otherwise it would seem that all patterns are
    intellectual by equating dynamic/static with pre-intellectual/intellectual.
    What do you think?

    Mark: 31-01-04: Agree. But! Severe coherence is a 'third state' between chaos
    and order - the sweet spot. Think about this 'third state' allot more and you
    may begin to see that it may be described in two ways: 1. As a motivation
    from DQ. 2. As a coalescence - coherence - move towards DQ. This will require
    some thinking and imagination on your part Steve, and you may find the
    illustrations i made for TEOC helpful? If not, ignore them.

    Recently I said, "To infer patterns of any kind, one must rise to the
    intellectual level since inferences are intellectual constructs." Platt
    agreed, DM disagreed. I think the disagreement concerned an implication
    that all patterns are intellectual. My use of "inference" implies symbolic
    representation of patterns so I stand by my original statement.

    I've been working with the definition of "pattern" as "perceptual structure"
    where structure could refer to inorganic, biological, social, or
    intellectual structure.

    Mark: 31-01-04: I understand the frustration in making one's own vocabulary
    and then not quite being able to use it with other people! That's real
    philosophy for you, and i admire you for giving it a try. At the risk of blowing my
    own trumpet, i kind of feel the 'third state' sweet spot SQ-SQ tension stuff has
    textual support from Lila, ZMM and SOVD.

    Does anyone have a better definition of "pattern"? One problem I see with
    "perceptual structure" as an MOQ definition is that it implies an S/O
    relationship of a perceiver and that which is perceived. Is pattern an
    inherently S/O term?

    Mark: 31-01-04: As long as patterns are understood to exist in an
    evolutionary relationship with DQ, we can then think of that relationship in new ways
    which avoid S/O totally and completely (he says emphasising the point)! It is
    clearly stated in Lila that patterns and DQ cannot exist without each other. So,
    how do they relate? Answer: At the sweet spot.

    Please never hesitate to push for more responses. I only wish to help Steve.
    All the best,
    Mark

    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 : Sat Jan 31 2004 - 20:44:37 GMT