Hi Ron, Thanks for a response that understands it is a thought experiment under consideration and not a manifesto to have me?collared by the hand of authority.
Now to business. 1. I think it is important to realize in this discussion of artificial conditions in an effort to "maximize DQ" we must consider that our mind functions utilizing memory and connections of remembered experience in order to understand any sort of sensory stimuli. Consequently you are always going to be dealing with static patterns when it come to any sort of comprehension. 1. reply: DQ is not comprehended as you acknowledge, but it is experienced. If we accept that DQ simply is, then experience of it can be quantified in the degree to which static patterns are removed in order for DQ to be experienced unmediated. In my view, and in the view of a number of artists i have discussed this matter with, the pre lingual state appears to be a candidate recognised independently by those concerned. That is to say, the feeling this is in fact the case is prevalent. 2. I would reckon, by virtue of this, that maximizing DQ would be something akin to Alzheimer's disease in your definition. Pure access to DQ would be to not remember or retain anything about prior experience. 2. reply: I disagree for the following reason: Alzheimer's is a?function of degenerative static patterns and involves degenerative comprehension. 1. Acknowledges this is therefore not relevant for the experiment. 3. but is this the level of awareness that is pointed to by Pirsig and the "zennies"? Perhaps 3. reply: Experiments such as these may be useful tools?for exploring areas of uncertainty. 4. but pragmatically it doesn't do much for our situation unless what you are after is saying that Pirsig is advocating that everyone get in line for their electro shock therapy. 4. reply: I prefer to talk about the moq rather than Pirsig; the moq may have ramifications Pirsig is not aware of? Our situation is that which would undergo radical transformation. Therefore,?locating normative standards within our situation is putting the cart before the horse. I don't understand?the relevance of?electro shock therapy for the experiment. 5. I think what both Pirsig and the "zennies" are pointing to is the ability to have our cake and eat it too. 5. reply: It?may not have been possible to avoid this choice before, but this experiment has as one of its starting conditions an imagined technology which?removes this choice?for the first time in the evolutionary development of static patterns. 6. I mean, what good is DQ if you can't comprehend a damn bit of it? 6. reply: Please correct me if i have got all this wrong, but for Zennies, isn't the personal pronoun you use here part of the problem? This may be a?central issue which generates fear. 7. what makes the endeavour "mystical" is just this balance of dynamic/static awareness. 7. reply: I shall have to take your word for this Ron. My understanding is that mysticism acknowledges we can't have our cake and eat it. See 5. 8. Maximizing it suggests quantifying it and quantifying DQ is meaningless in universal terms. 8. reply: The moq employs quantitative verbs: higher value, more moral. etc. Better value and better moral is stating relative betterness isn't it? However, in static terms it may make sense to talk about degrees to which static patterns are opaque to DQ. 9. I hear SA and Dmb arguing much the same, a society of Maximized DQ entities, (for you can not call them human as we know the term) is not a society at all. 9. reply: The moq states that all static patterns are migrating toward DQ. Social patterns are a stage on that evolutionary development, and i am not aware of it having been insisted that they must persist for ever. 10. What you would have is a collection of individual entities which would experience but would not comprehend a damn thing. 10. reply: This may be so, but that which is being experiences is DQ. You make this sound as if?it is trivial. 11. reply: what you would have is an incredible technologically complex group of goldfish. 11. reply: Emotive. No celebrity would wish to be reduced to the status of a Goldfish. squonk Ron: to all involved, I think it is important to realize in this discussion of artificial conditions in an effort to "maximize DQ" we must consider that our mind functions utilizing memory and connections of remembered experience in order to understand any sort of sensory stimuli. Consequently you are always going to be dealing with static patterns when it come to any sort of comprehension. I would reckon, by virtue of this, that maximizing DQ would be something akin to Alzheimer's disease in your definition. Pure access to DQ would be to not remember or retain anything about prior experience. but is this the level of awareness that is pointed to by Pirsig and the "zennies"? Perhaps, but pragmatically it doesn't do much for our situation unless what you are after is saying that Pirsig is advocating that everyone get in line for their electro shock therapy. I think what both Pirsig and the "zennies" are pointing to is the ability to have our cake and eat it too. I mean, what good is DQ if you can't comprehend a damn bit of it? what makes the endeavor "mystical" is just this balance of dynamic/static awareness. Maximizing it suggests quantifying it and quantifying DQ is meaningless in universal terms. I hear SA and Dmb arguing much the same, a society of Maximized DQ entities, (for you can not call them human as we know the term) is not a society at all. What you would have is a collection of individual entities which would experience but would not comprehend a damn thing. what you would have is an incredible technologically complex group of goldfish. 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/
