On Mar 4, 2009, at 5:13:10 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: At 07:59 AM 3/4/2009, you wrote: > > At 07:08 AM 3/4/2009, you wrote: > > >Marsha, > > > > > >I like your description of "self." > > > > > > > The self is an ever-changing, > > > > collection of interrelated and interconnected, inorganic, > > biological, > > > > social and intellectual, static patterns of value responding to > > > > Dynamic Quality. > > > > > >I take it this means you believe the self is no illusion even though > > Pirsig > > >and some others say it is. > > > > > >Platt > > > > > > > > > Hi Platt, > > > > The self is empty of independent (inherent) existence, therefore it > > is an illusion but,,, conventionally it is user-friendly and > > useful. - Where would I hang this _I_ if I didn't have this > > conventional, but illusionary self? Who would I dance with all day > > if I didn't have this illusionary self? Who would create this play > > that is life? > > > > > > Marsha > >Hi Marsha, > >Is "self" then a matter of expediency -- a useful figment of imagination, >like some find God to be? > >Platt
Platt, As far as I know, self isn't other than an ever-changing, collection of interrelated and interconnected, inorganic, biological, social and intellectual, static patterns of value responding to Dynamic Quality. Maybe what is of interest is what pattern is active at any given nano-second. Maybe it is interesting, but maybe not. The God-static-pattern-of-value is not meaningful to me. Marsha / Hi Marsha, I like your description of the self as well, as it is dynamic and not separate. I can feel the self, but like Quality, when I describe it, I pin it down into something and have to leave the rest of it out. There is, perhaps, a useful concept in quantum mechanics known as state vector collapse. While I don't claim to understand the math, my understanding of what it states is that: everything exists in a probabilistic state. As soon as we measure something, it is reduced to a single state (it collapses); the act of measuring it by the observer creates this collapse. In the same way, as soon as we define Quality (an act I believe Phaedrus was tormented by) we collapse it into a single reality having to forgo the rest. The self may be the same thing. As soon as I collapse it descriptively I am left with one static notion, rather than the dynamic one, which may be an endless collection of static ones.. I know I am a neophyte in this forum, and that this has already probably been discussed (collapsed), I just wanted to bring some of the notions of physics up (again?) to see if science has any bearing on MoQ. Thanks, Willblake2 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/ 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/
