Hi Bo, DMB,
On Jul 5, 2009, at 3:48 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Dear David.
3 July you said:.
One doesn't need to "deduce" the discrepancy between concepts and
reality from the DQ/sq distinction because that distinction and the
discrepancy are exactly the same thing. Concepts are static
intellectual patterns and reality is Dynamic Quality.
Bo said:
You seem oblivious to the fact that the first DQ/SQ distinction is the
inorganic one and its perception of value is not by concepts nor is
the
biological, only with the social level and language did concepts enter
the scene, but only with intellect did the the reality/concept
distinction
occur. Your resistance shows how immensely strong intellect's ties are
- they want to dominate the scene - but these must be torn if one
is to
enter Quality's meta-level.
Steve:
I think Pirsig disagrees and favors DMB's interpretation of the MOQ:
LC annotation 60. "This is difficult to untangle...The difference is
rooted in the historic chicken-and-egg controversy over whether
matter came first and produces ideas, or ideas come
first and produce what we know as matter. The MOQ says that Quality
comes first which
produces ideas which produce what we know as matter. The scientific
community that
has produced Complementarity, almost invariably presumes that matter
comes first and
produces ideas. However, as if to further the confusion, the MOQ says
that the idea that matter comes first is a high quality idea! ..."
DMB, I've enjoyed reading your stuff of late. All that book learnin'
is doing you good.
Best,
Steve
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/
