Thanks Joe. I don't know if that's what Bo means or not. I may not detail the explanation the way you do. In other words, your style differs from my style, which is all good. I do see you've been able to incorporate quality into your life instead of reaching for it somewhere 'out there' while pushing some ghostly 'camps' away. Thinking is still a quality event. Washing dishes is still a quality event.
thanks. bird singing at night, SA > SA: Bo, this is what I mean. Where up above do you > say what dq/sq split is, other than an axiom? This > is > the same as saying lapodocoldieameida is reality. > I'm > not trying to be harsh, but if you can't say what > dq/sq split is, then lapodocoldieameida might be > better instead. Don't you think? Is your reality > complete mu, complete denial of everything, such as > Jainism? If these comments are true, then your > reality is truly personal, thus, something I > wouldn't > know about only you would. Is that your intent? > > Hi SA, Bo and all, > > I realize this is addressed to Bo, but I want to add > my two cents to ³a > statement accepted as true without proof or > argument². IMO Dq/sq is a simple > division. DQ is undefined and SQ is defined > reality. Put that statement > into history. DQ in metaphysics is the Conscious > only experience of an > individual. It differs from the subjective > experience of SOM, which > proposes an abstracted essence given intentional > existence in a mind. DQ is > a real, undefined, conscious experience of > existence. SQ can be described > as a Conscious/Mechanical experience. The Conscious > element in SQ experience > is embodied in ³analogy², metaphor, or gesture. The > Mechanical element is > defined mathematically. Another way of looking at > it, DQ is an order in > existence and is a law unto itself. SQ is a > Manifestation in existence, > requiring three aspects for intelligibility, what it > is, what it isn¹t, what > supports it (DQ). Evolution is an acknowledgement of > the duality DQ/SQ. > Metaphysics is DQ/SQ. This is how I understand how > Bo envisions a MOQ > meta-level of metaphysics ³an axiom accepted as true > without proof or > argument². > > Joe > > On 5/9/08 1:00 PM, "Heather Perella" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > SA: Bo, this is what I mean. Where up above do > you > > say what dq/sq split is, other than an axiom? > This is > > the same as saying lapodocoldieameida is reality. > I'm > > not trying to be harsh, but if you can't say what > > dq/sq split is, then lapodocoldieameida might be > > better instead. Don't you think? Is your reality > > complete mu, complete denial of everything, such > as > > Jainism? If these comments are true, then your > > reality is truly personal, thus, something I > wouldn't > > know about only you would. Is that your intent? > > > 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/ > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 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/
