Hi Joe 23 Sep. you wrote: > Hi Magnus, Bo and All, > Magnus, the gentleness of your generous open-heart approach is very > appealing and special!
Yes, Magnus can be ... mellow ...at times ;-) > IMO DQ cannot be an agent of change. DQ is an > order in existence. That is why no rational explanation can be found > to capture the workings of DQ. The dynamic/static "interaction" in the MOQ resembles the mind/matter one in SOM, intricately connected yet worlds apart (only not creating.any paradoxes that I know) consequently you are both right and wrong regarding DQ as agent of change. But over to the darwinist/creationist dispute that Pirsig claims the MOQ resolves by making it an intellectual versus social level struggle and moreover that the issue they bicker about is the biological level out of the inorganic. > Evolution describes levels in existence. It is useless to ask how! I agree. The biological level out of the inorganic is no more or less "irrational" (i.e. inexplicable by intellect) than the 3rd. out of the 2 nd. or the 4th. out of the 3rd. MOQ simply says that all levels grow in complexity, and that a complex (dynamic) pattern provides the stepping stone for the next Q development. > Only the undefined individual has that experience which can only be > communicated by analogy or metaphor. Yet that Subjective part of the > individual is experienced. You are "deep" at times and I'm not always sure if your statements are MOQ or SOM. > SOM is the false assertion that mind is separate from matter and > definable. Aristotle asserts that the mind abstracts the ³essence² > from an image and gives it ³intentional² existence in a mind, a word. > MOQ asserts that mind does not exist apart from matter, only the > individual Subject exists. You know "your" Aristotle and this sounds most plausible, wish Ham understood that his Essentialism is straight from Aristotle's > Language exists. The assertion that evolution exists indicates > undefined levels in existence. S undefined individual, O defined > Object. Another division which describes behavior is Conscious, > undefined behavior, and Mechanical, defined behavior. I am mostly > unconscious in what I believe, and your treatise deserves careful > consideration. Even more cryptic. 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/
