Hello, international intellectual friends and neighbours:
What does the MOQ have to say about Power?
Well, I think the answer to this month's question will depend on the
answer to THIS perennial question:
What do You have to say about the MOQ?
Which really should be asked AFTER we are agreed on:
What does Robert Pirsig have to say about the MOQ?
I felt last month's discussion to be of great quality, as we (at
least) discovered how variant are the opinions on the essence and
existence of the MOQ. This led me to the conclusion that before
application to "those questions which reasonable men must at last
bring themselves to face", we must decide on what we are applying.
This is evident in the confusion surrounding this question:
What is Dynamic Quality?
A) That aspect which is related to time & METAPHYSICS:
"...is a stream of quality events going on and on forever, always
at the cutting edge of the present."(SODV)
"at birth this sense of value is very Dynamic..."(SODV)
"the pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality, the source of all
things, completely simple and always new"
"unmeasured phenomenal object"
"the source of all things"
"the conceptually unknown"
"undifferentiated aesthetic continuum"
-by "undifferentiated" he means that it is without conceptual
distinctions
-by "continuum" he means that it goes on and on forever
"When A.N.Whitehead wrote that "mankind is driven forward by dim
apprehensions of things too obscure for its existing
language," he was writing about Dynamic Quality"
always new, spontaneous
the aim of mystic union
the romantic track which carries the classic train (static boxcars)
"...which cannot be described in any encyclopedia..."
"Although DQ, the Quality of freedom, creates this world in which
we live, these patterns of static quality, the quality of order,
preserve our world. Neither static nor DQ can survive without the
other"
B) That aspect which is related to excellence & MORALITY:
"not just life, but everything, is an ethical activity...this
definition of 'betterness' - this beginning response to Dynamic
Quality - is an elementary unit of ethics upon which all right
and wrong can be based"
"Natural selection is DQ at work....'undefined fittest'"
"what makes us jump off a stove at a 90 degree angle (as opposed
to 180)"
"undifferentiated aesthetic continuum"
-by "aesthetic" he means that it has quality
"Because Quality is morality. Make no mistake about it. They're
identical"
simply put --- BETTERNESS
"It was the MORAL force that had motivated the brujo in Zuni"
Worth, Excellence, Dharma
"While sustaining bio and soc patterns
Kill all intellectual patterns.
Kill them completely
And then follow Dynamic Quality
And morality will be served"
= Enlightenment = Nirvana
"Dynamic value is an integral part of science."
"But the (MOQ) also says that Dynamic Quality - the value-force
that chooses an elegant mathematical solution to a laborious
one, or a brilliant experiment over a confusing, inconclusive
one -....is a higher moral order than static scientific truth."
The force of Freedom & Creativity
"pure fun"
So, find your own examples, make your own classification system (this
here is very rough and quickly split and pieced together), BASED ON
LILA & ZMM, and then you can ask:
Is power Dynamic?
Is war Dynamic?
Is cooperation or competition or both Dynamic?
If Dynamic Quality is so undefinable, why is it so often defined?
Why do these piecemeal definitions disagree? or do they?
Is ANYTHING Dynamic GOOD? or can a Dynamic advance be BAD?
Is it ONLY after centuries that we can answer this question in
relation to specific Dynamic Events (war?)
If the MoQ can be summed up: "Good is a Noun"
-Why does DQ seem to be a "Verb"?
If the MoQ is as clear, simple and beautiful as I think it to be,
why do I get so muddled trying to work out the details?
Why don't we all immediately understand and agree on the very
first basic principles?
You must see what I'm getting at. Discussing the relation of the MOQ
to any thing/situation is quite lost without a common understanding
beforehand of just what the MOQ IS. Degenerate as it is, perhaps we
need a 'catechism'. Ideally, I think it would be very valuable for
each of us to sum up in an essay our perception of the essentials.
Having 10 or 15 different views/explanations allows us to pick and
choose the highest quality aspects of each. It allows us to see where
the major discrepancies are. It allows us to find out who most
closely resembles our own thinking. It creates Dynamic opportunity
for personal and group improvement.
I really should be focusing on this month's topic. So:
If the MOQ is to be a POWERFUL tool (valuable) we should probably
agree on the static design and function of the tool before we attempt
to Dynamically solve global warfare.
rich
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org
