Greetings Bo,
I'm going to try to explain my perspective of the MOQ. The
Metaphysics of Quality is a metaphysics that states the Reality
equals Quality (Value). Quality can be said to have two
aspects: Dynamic and Static. Static Quality is made up of static
patterns of value which can be categorized into four evolutionary
levels: Inorganic, Biological, Social and Intellectual. The MOQ
postulates that REALITY EQUALS QUALITY (Dynamic and static). The
four evolutionary, categorizing levels represent all static quality
(patterns of value). Quality that is not static quality is Dynamic
Quality. So the top most point-of-view is not the MOQ, but is
REALITY EQUALS QUALITY.
QUALITY is the ocean, Dynamic/static is the waves. imho
Marsha
Marsha
The MOQ, represented as knowledge, explanation, diagrams and all
mental constructs, is of the Intellectual static pattern of value variety.
At 12:27 PM 5/27/2009, you wrote:
Marsha, Dan, William Blake and Mark Smith.
To start with Marsha's of May 26,
> > Time and change have a relationship, yes? What does it actually mean to
> > state that everything is always in a state of change? Everything! I'm
> > thinking of the water analogy: If everything is water, and there is
> > nothing that is not water, then there is no meaning to water, for there
> > is no way of distinguishing a difference between water and nonwater.
> > Seems if you translate that into change, then what humans have actually
> > defined as change is illusion. And if our definition of change is an
> > illusion, how can anything be conceived of as constant, as in
> > Einstein's 'C', when everything is changing? Against what is it
> > measured? Can you untangle this mess between water, change and time?
Agree, the "everything is ..." postulate is stale and that goes for
"Reality is Quality" too. Pirsig makes it sound as that is the revolution
and the MOQ some secondary afterthought, but the two are inexticably
connected.
Markhsmith or Willblake (can't you use a name instead of these cryptic
e-mail abbreviations?) responded to Marsha's above.
> If Einstein is correct, then everything is energy. Everything is
> transforming into something else continuously. That is change. But
> does anything really change? Physics states that no energy is ever
> lost or created; there is conservation. So at some level nothing
> changes, always the same energy. At our level, Things to seem to
> change. An illusion? I suppose, as much as everything else is. The
> word is confusing. If everything is an illusion then so is that
> statement. Don't believe anything I write (not even my telling you
> not to believe anything I write).
Einstein revolutionized physics by his "Energy Metaphysics" where the
basic axiom was "Matter is Energy" (E=mc2) but this does not say that
matter and energy are identical, there is an internal schism between
dynamic energy (released in nuclear bombs)and static energy (matter
as we know it) And this is what all is about in his "metaphysics", the
said equation contains the schism.
This pertains to Pirsig's (silly) "Quality as Dynamic and the MOQ as
static". The "Quality=Reality" postulate is part and parcel of the MOQ,
because it does not mean a thing without the static counterpoint. To
speak of a Quality independent of the MOQ is both impossible and
counterproductive, as if speaking of Energy independent of the said
dynamic/static context. Thanks Mr.Smith for this excellent metaphor.
NB
One thing however, the physical world is MOQ's "inorganic level" and
MOQ's dynamic/static schism has nothing to do with energy's two
forms. All inorganic patterns be it ordinary matter or forces (gravity,
electromagnetism ... whatever) are "static inorganic patterns".
> So the water analogy. Everything in this world are like waves on
> an ocean. They appear from nowhere on the surface, and disappear.
> A constant flux of waves, just like matter, always changing shapes. Big,
> small. I'll bet you have some of the electrons I had a while ago. They
> are yours now, keep them for a while. The waves are created from the
> great ocean, arising from it returning to it, but the water is always
> there to create new ones. Does the wave try to survive as long as it can?
> I don't think so, it just is.
Water and (water) waves is a very good analogy to illustrate the
DQ/SQ relationship (not wind waves however, these may be likened to
the various static patterns) but perhaps "standing waves" as in a river.
Or - better - electromagnetic waves because these propagates in no
known medium at all and shows the superfluity of Quality after the
MOQ ... and the impossibility of it outside the MOQ.
> The speed of light is constant, because time disappears at that speed.
> Time gets slower and slower the faster you go, until poof! we are at
> the speed of light. Hard to change things with no time.
If two beams of light meet, then the relative speed between the two
must be twice that of light .... or?. I'm a bit rusty on Relativity
and don't
remember, no trap.
Bodvar "Bo" Skutvik
.
_____________
The self is a thought-flow of ever-changing, interrelated and
interconnected, inorganic, biological, social and intellectual,
static patterns of value responding to Dynamic Quality.
.
.
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/
