On Thursday 26 March 2009 11:22 AM Krimel to Andre, Arlo, Platt all
[Krimel] > Right, every moment is loaded with DQ. We can elect to filter > that DQ through our static patterns of conception and habit. This > is certainly comfortable but can lead to total reliance on those > conceptual patterns. The moment becomes dynamic not by killing > static patterns completely, but seeing them for what they are and > rendering them transparent. > Hi Krimel, Arlo, Andre, Platt & All, Since DQ is undefined, one way to study the moment is to try to understand how SQ is transparent. How does it relate to me/DQ/the moment? How does it relate to the order of evolution MOQ? Is it active or passive or neutral? Yeah! All this in the blink of an eye. If sometimes Homer nods, do I sometimes nod over DQ/SQ. Can I train myself to stay awake a little more by study? Joe On 3/26/09 11:22 AM, "Krimel" <[email protected]> wrote: > Arlo: > What I could say, if you'd prefer, is that "all things tend towards > preference". If this was not true, the cosmos would be a chaotic swirl of > randomness and nothing more. This does not mean we shouldn't challenge our > habits, and be open to change. Certainly not. > > Andre: > Hi Arlo, Krimel, Platt and All: > Not sure if I understand you correctly here. Yes, 'all things tend towards > preference' but 'achieved' preference needs to be preserved, latched. > > [Krimel] > I don't work myself into a snit when Arlo uses the term "preference." Unlike > dmb, who uses the term to sneak volition in through the back door, I believe > Arlo understands that "preference" mean a certain probability and nothing > more. But even when Arlo uses it, it makes my butt pucker. I do not like > things sneaking in the back door. > > [Andre] > Evolution is one wonderful example of this process. But you can also apply > it to your own personal growth ( not wanting to sound too fluffy). > Continuous 'absorption' (not exposure) of dynamic quality will drive a > person nuts (IMHO), and if if does not have that effect on the person, it > will certainly have it on the persons around him/her. (Refer to your > 'imagine' paragraph). > > [Krimel] > The "beauty" of the theory of evolution is that it applies not just to > biology but to all instance where things are changing and in flux. It is > about how static patterns form and persist in the face of dynamic change. > > [Andre} > I do not want to go through the process of having to 're-invent' my world > every morning. That's what the analogues are for. > I remember the first time I walked through the Musee D'Orsay, and also The > Louvre and the Van Gogh museum here in Amsterdam. After a while it became > 'too much'. Such dynamic stuff, but I needed time to 'integrate' all this > dynamism, latch it, give it a place, so that , next time I could experience > 'the same' with renewed, enriched 'eyes'. > > I agree with you; we all need routine, predictability, assurance and > re-assurance. This does not mean that DQ is not available to us all the time > to challenge us, to suspend, alter or shatter our routines. > > [Krimel] > As I said a while back we are not striving for DQ; we lust for SQ. We want > things to be static and predictable. The most beautiful experience I > personally can have of anything in the world around me is to take it for > granted. This means that I do not have to worry about it. It is predictable. > I can count on it. > > A side note here on the misc. discussions involving MP and his butchery of > civics. The entire purpose of the US Constitution is to create and foster > static quality. That is what checks and balances do. They create static > latches so that the dynamic forces that wield power can not overwhelm each > other. The natural impulse of society to make human relations stable and > predictable. > > The Chinese express it well in the adage: "It is a curse to live in > interesting times." > > [Andre] > The extent to which we are comfortable in our routines will determine the > extent to which we allow ourselves to respond/ be open to DQ. > If Platt argues that he doesn't experience DQ all the time or that he > doesn't have a deep, mystical DQ experience (that it is rare and not > available to just anyone) says more about Platt than DQ. > > [Krimel] > Right, every moment is loaded with DQ. We can elect to filter that DQ > through our static patterns of conception and habit. This is certainly > comfortable but can lead to total reliance on those conceptual patterns. The > moment becomes dynamic not by killing static patterns completely, but seeing > them for what they are and rendering them transparent. > > > > > 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/
