dmb says to Krimel: Are you saying yin is static and yang is dynamic? That's weird. I think yin and yang are the two sides of all dualistic pairs and that Pirsig never intended any such comparison.
Krimel said to dmb: I think you are confused a tad here. I would read this as: The Tao (Quality) that can be named (SQ/DQ) is not the real Tao (Quality). DQ/SQ are yin and yang the opposites that reveal themselves as two side of the Quality coin. dmb says:Right back at you. I think you're confused. Yin and yang are both static, they represent the world of the pairs of opposites, the conceptual distinctions we make such as male and female, active and passive, etc. dmb says: Are you saying yin is static and yang is dynamic? [Krimel] Yes! That is exactly what I am saying for about the 83rd time. [Krimel] '...Yin and Yang; Static and Dynamic. Andre: Must jump in here gentlemen and correct. I am not an expert on Taoism but the concepts of Yin and Yang are 'dynamic principles whose interaction accounts for all that exists and occurs in the universe...:Yin and Yang are not static; they are elemental processes'. (DiSanto and Steele, Guidebook to ZAMM' p103). The concepts of Yin and Yang are derived from the Tao and without streching oneself too far can be likened to the concepts of subject and object in the MoQ,which are derived from DQ. Pirsig has likened/ substituted his Quality with the Tao. 'The Tao is neither yin nor yang but is the ground of both and permeates both...In Phaedrus' parrallel scheme, as I understand it, Quality, the unnameable One, gives rise to the myriad nameable things by way of the Two, subject and object. Quality is neither subject nor object but is the ground of both and permeates both. Subject energy and object energy produce by their interaction all that can be named and defined'(op cit p115). Below follow some Wikipedia 'definitions': Yin and yang are complementary opposites within a greater whole. Everything has both yin and yang aspects, which constantly interact, never existing in absolute stasis. Yin-yang is not an actual substance or force, the way it might be conceived of in western terms. Instead, it is a universal way of describing the interactions and interrelations of the natural forces that do occur in the world. It applies as well to social constructions - e.g. value judgements like good and evil, rich and poor, honor and dishonor - yet it is often used in those contexts as a warning, since by its principles extreme good will turn to evil, extreme wealth to poverty, extreme honor to dishonor. I think that there is merit in making the parallel between Yin/Yang and Subject/Object in that they reinforce the interactive, and thereby ever changing nature of SQ as these patterns are 'moving' toward ever expanding expressions of freedom and harmony. And this is what Lao Tsu, Confucius and Pirsig were after no? (each in their own way). I may not do justice to the Tao, the MoQ or to DiSanto and Steele because I have been quoting very selectively. Therefore suggest to give it a read yourself.(pp100-118). For what it is worth, Andre 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/
