> [Krimel]
> 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.

[Bo]
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?

[Krimel]
These are matter upon which I have expounded at great length many times. I
appreciate your frustration at having to continuously begin again with
newcomers.

The essential Quality of the MoQ is that there are things that wiggle (DQ)
and things that hold still (SQ). If you look at anything, whether it is in
the world of physical things or the world of mental constructs, you will
find that some aspects of it contribute to ongoing change and others to
ongoing stability. Everywhere there are patterns of relationships and they
can be understood in terms of their Static and Dynamic Qualities. These same
qualities are at work in the world of matter and energy and in the world of
ideas and concepts. 

We as creatures are instruments of pattern recognition. We synthesize the
evidence of our senses into patterns and estimates of probability. Here is a
bit on this I posted not long ago for David M.

First there is the Tao.
The Tao is undefined but not unknown.
It is The Way.
Undefined because Chance can not be contained.
Known to the extent that we can estimate odds.
Known to the extent that we can recognize pattern.
Patterns and probabilities give us our sense of The Way.

We understand patterns in terms of opposites.
Poles define extremes.
White/Black, Positive/Negative, Something/Nothing, 
Fast/Slow, Love/Hate, Wakening/Sleeping.

Where there are no extremes, we manufacture them.
Yours/Mine, North/South, High/Low, Red/Blue, 
Communist/Capitalist Poles are the edges of probability. 

Patterns are constructed from the bottom up.
Time is the bottom line.
The First distinction is between Now and Then.
Two points connected by a timeline.
All Space unfolds in Time.

The First Distinction is often posed as Here and There Or Inside and
Outside.
But you can only be Here Now.
Without a Then, you can't get There from Here.
Here and There are also preceded by This and That.

All patterns are formed from:
Now and Then
Here and There
This and That
The Way meanders through them

[Bo]
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. 

[Krimel]
Taoism is not part of Buddhism. Taoism is not necessarily mystical. ZMM is
clearly rooted in Taoism. Pirsig states this explicitly not only in ZMM but
in his letters to Ant. 

Lila, with its focus on SQ and DQ is clearly an extension of this Taoist
line of thinking from ZMM. Where Yin is the passive principle and Yang is
the Active principle. 

Levels and speculations beyond these principles are mostly centered on the
"what if" games Pirsig plays after establishing this.

[Bo]
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. 

[Krimel]
Any connections between Taoism and Buddhism as such are purely a matter of
coincidence. Lao Tsu and The Buddha have no historical, theological or
ideological connection. Zen Buddhism is the result of a Japanese synthesis
of Buddhist practice and Taoist metaphysics.

Taoist metaphysics is central to the MoQ. 



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/

Reply via email to