Hi "Case" now as Krimel. On 2 Dec. you said:
> Or one can regard the MoQ a way to construct and evaluate levels. It > shows us that whatever levels or point of view we adopt we will see > similar patterns of static and dynamic quality at work. I must admit that this is beyond me. Could you in less subtler ways tell if it is pro or contra or some even more elevated view? > [Bo] > The initial Quality=Reality (all is value) sentence is a postulate and > can't be proved. I find Pirsig's many demonstrations futile, the proof > is the new world order and its ensuing clarity, but it - first - > requires an open mind and then a different understanding of the 4th. > Level. > [Krimel] > Calling the Tao Quality was a serious mislabeling. Equating it with > reality is a violation of the spirit as well as the intent of leaving > the Tao undefined. Illusions on illusions of illusions of Value. Well, my view is that comparing the MOQ to either Buddhism or Taoism is (not exactly wrong, but) unnecessary, the MOQ transcends SOM in a way that leaves it less "mystical", more suited the Western - um - mind. If this is what you mean however? It sounds as if you suffer from the even worse illusion that the Tao and (Buddhism's innermost reality) are outside Taoism and/or Buddhism. Bo Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
