From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Fri Jul 23 2004 - 16:45:49 BST
Dear Dan,
I responded to this post immediately, but it was too long to get through.
This is why i sometimes divide posts up. Please may be try and keep things more
concise?
Dan:
Hi Mark
The thread could very well be called see for yourself; it would suit the
purpose either way. I told you that the name of the thread is an
organizational device, nothing more. There are no goal posts so they're
right where they've always been. I can't move what doesn't exist. If you go
back and read over what I've written you'll see all along that I've been
saying just this you agree with now. It's good we agree.
Mark 21-7-04: All i have been trying to indicate is that coherence provides
freedom in day to day activities. While engaged in coherent activity, (which at
the intellectual level is imagination and creative thought also) the self,
which the Buddha considered a source of dissatisfaction, is forgotten. We, 'see
for ourselves.'
The important thing for me to emphasise is that coherence is solidly based in
the MOQ.
Dan:
I mean your idea that humans are most recently evolved and so how much more
free can they be, where did it come from? I don't remember reading it in any
of Robert Pirsig's writings.
Mark 21-7-04: I've made a mistake here Dan and i apologise. The most recent
patterns are Intellectual patterns. I should have said: "But the best ones, as
far as the MOQ understands, involve the most recently evolved patterns:
Intellectual, of which the MOQ is a very recent example. How more free can a Human
be?"
I tend to say the intellectual level is a repertoire of static patterns.
Within this repertoire there may arise sq-sq (purposeless) tensions at which point
DQ pushes evolution at the intellectual level - the 'ahaa'! feeling when
inspiration strikes.
Dan:
The relationship changed; it wasn't the same again.
Mark 21-7-04: The master's displeasure was indicated by his sitting with his
back to EH. But that episode was forgotten and the master/student relationship
was continued. EH did not respect the art. And this is also seen in 20th
century American fly fishing in Montana!
I suspect that is why Redford made that movie in the first place.
Both archery and fly fishing recognise sweet spots.
Dan:
I would say this is how we learn here in the West but it is not necessarily
the only way or the best way. What I mean to say is that we in the West tend
to take action to learn. A zen master tends to learn through inaction. So
perhaps it's not that student Herrigal cheated as we understand cheating to
be but rather he took action in learning a new skill instead of inaction.
Once the master saw this, he realized any further teaching was useless.
Mark 21-7-04: I meant cheating, 'not as we understand it.' I expect a fly
fisherman can cheat, 'not as we understand it' also?
Dan:
I suspect William James Sidis, Bobby Fischer, and others of their stripes
suffer fools poorly which sets them apart socially. But that wasn't my point
in bringing it up.
Mark 21-7-04: What was you point then? I was pointing out that archery, fly
fishing, chess, mathematics all have sweet spots. That is to say, exceptional
sq-sq tension or coherence (within their respective repertoire's of sq
patterns).
Thank you for your comments,
Dan
Mark 21-7-04: Pleasure Dan as always.
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 : Fri Jul 23 2004 - 16:48:24 BST