[Bo]
Before I have tried the same example in a lesser scale, about
Newton's Physics place within Newton's Physics, but I don't think it
got through.
[Arlo]
Maybe this is stating the obvious, but the problem here
("containment" as you refer to it) is one of self-reference, that is,
trying to use something to define itself. This puts us right
smack-dab into the paradoxes and recursions of Goedel and, to a
lesser but important sense, Pirsig.
For young Phaedrus, a critical point was the attempt to apply the
"scientific method TO the scientific method", then it was "turning
analytic reason back on itself", and later was his recognition that
NO symbolic system was ever capable of containing Quality, "Since the
One is the source of all things and includes all things in it, it
cannot be defined in terms of those things, since no matter what
thing you use to define it, the thing will always describe something
less than the One itself.", along with a final "nod" to
self-reference when he laments the Chairman's approach "He might
learn something. Once it's stated that "the dialectic comes before
anything else," this statement itself becomes a dialectical entity,
subject to dialectical question."
When you try to "put the MOQ into the MOQ" you are at a stall point.
You simply can not contain a system within itself without leading to
the "strange loops", paradoxes and recursions that brings. As
Hofstadter refers to it, this is the "essential incompleteness" of
any system, it can never contain itself. And so, as Pirsig points
out, the only way to reference a system from within its system is by
allegory, analogy and indirect pointers.
This is what you are doing (and I add, correctly), and why it is not
only "not easy" to define the MOQ in terms of itself, but IMPOSSIBLE.
And this is why saying "the MOQ is an intellectual pattern within a
system called the MOQ" is immediately self-referential and hence
paradoxical.
Maybe the MOQ is not a thing (I am just speculating based on recent
thoughts), but a "doing". Maybe it is better to think of the MOQ not
as a pattern, but as a Verb. This would tie somewhat into Platt's
"Weltanschauung" which translates almost as a "thing" (worldview) but
in German means something more "active", more like a "way of
being". And that certainly gets as well to your suggestion that it's
"how we live".
Ron:
This is what seems to be the vagueness of all of it, what Bo is speaking
Of is intent. Is intent intellectual? it is an attitude.
The ancient masters of the sword say that the perfect form is formless.
It is the vagueness of aim, direction and purpose-ness in living.
Pirsig, I believe by using Terms like care and gumption, place meaning
in the development of Intent much like the eastern martial practices. It
is firmly rooted in the dynamic:
"By inconsistency and frivolity we stray from the Way and show ourselves
to be beginners. In this we do much harm."
"How should a person respond when he is asked, "As a human being, what
is essential in terms of purpose and discipline?" First, let us say, "It
is to become of the mind that is right now pure and lacking
complications." People in general all seem to be dejected. When one has
a pure and uncomplicated mind, his expression will be lively. When one
is attending to matters, there is one thing that comes forth from his
heart. That is, in terms of one's lord, loyalty; in terms of one's
parents, filial piety; in martial affairs, bravery ; and apart from
that, something that can be used by all the world.
This is very difficult to discover. Once discovered, it is again
difficult to keep in constant effect.
There is nothing outside the thought of the immediate moment."
Above all, the Way of the Samurai should be in being aware that you do
not know what is going to happen next, and in querying every item day
and night.
Although all things are not to be judged in this manner, I mention it in
the investigation of the Way of the Samurai. When the time comes, there
is no moment for reasoning. And if you have not done your inquiring
beforehand , there is most often shame. Reading books and listening to
people's talk are for the purpose of prior resolution.
Ron:
Thus is intellectuality to be used in MoQ, for purposes of prior
resolution In immediate experience. This is what is meant by intent.
Intent and purpose seem to be hollow when pursued intellectually. They
bring
With it the stigma of culture and social custom. Bo's Moq is immediate
experience, how that experience is met is shaped by intellectual
patterns.
The intellectual notions which orient the meeting of experience is what
We refer to as a metaphysic or belief structure, this supplies aim and
intent in our lives.
To orient intent with the flow of immediate experience proves very
successful in use. In this way betterness (verb) may be defined as
intent,
A vague notion aligned with immediate experience which evolves.
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/
