Hi Krimel, Nice to hear from you. On Jun 10, 2009, at 2:34:59 PM, Krimel <[email protected]> wrote:
[Willblake2 to John] Because Quality has direction, that is it is leading evolution, it would seem to me that it is differentiated. It creates hierarchies of SQ/DQ. At one point,I asked if it was similar to the Tao, which in my impression is undifferentiated. The Tao is simply creative in a circular manner, that is, not directional. [Krimel] This is one of the ideas that has basically run the MoQ into a ditch. Evolution is the end result of massively numerous random walks. Such we can look back, see where we have been and call it "good". But it tells us very little about the future other than that we have an almost unfettered ability to look back at the past and call it "good". Willblake2 Sounds like you are thinking a little like me about evolution. I'm not sure how random these walks are, since they are under immense control, both from the inside and from the outside. The rules that evolution has to abide by are numerous. Random would imply a certain amount of freedom to go any which way. It is true that evolution only has hindsight, kind of like the stock market, or a football game, however both those contain rules. Quality would appear to have rules, if I understand it correctly. It is these rules which create the distinct hierarchies mentioned in Lila. Something that is undifferentiated has no focus. I also do not think Tao is circular since that would actually make it directional. Willblake2 I suppose a circle is directional if one is in it. I don't want to get semantic about it. This is simply the expression of the Tao. Conservation of energy. If I take a scientific look at the world, it is fairly clear that many things are cyclical. By directional I meant with a beginning and a destination other than the beginning. By cyclical, I am merely expression my sense of the world, yours may be different. As I see it everything repeats itself endlessly in different time frames. [Willblake2] If both the Tao and Quality are considered the underlying fabric of reality. Quality is continually creating a better tapestry. The Tao is creating the same tapestry over and over again. [Krimel] I think there is no distinction between Tao and Quality. I think you are right that there are distinctions that can be made and lots of MoQers make them but for the most parts those distinction diminish the MoQ. Willblake2 The Tao does not claim to influence human behavior in the creation of better things, the way that Quality does. Quality has a system by which it is expressed, in layers, not the Tao. I would be content to think that Quality and the Tao are the same, but the underlying philosophy does not seem to fit. I'm not sure what you mean by diminish the MoQ, is this a celebrity contest? [Willblake2] I had another question that I asked, and that was: was Quality monotheistic or pluralistic. Is it the same as Brahman, or is it a guiding force interacting? [Krimel] I think both the MoQ and Taoism are forms of pantheistic monism. But that's just me. Willblake2 That works for me. One has a finger pointing somewhere, the other has no finger at all, just a beating heart. 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/
