Greetings,
While I understand that Dynamic Quality is indivisible, undefinable and
unknowable, I consider within the MoQ all static patterns of value are
relative. While they belong to a discreet level, they are experienced relative
to all other patterns. The first RMP quote dismisses "ethical relativism" but
not epistemological or ontological relativism. The second quote states that
experience (quality) is relative to individual history.
Marsha
"Then Phædrus feels a tugging to read the passage again, and he does so and
then -- what's this?! -- ``That which we translate `virtue ' but is in Greek
`excellence.'''
Lightning hits!
Quality! Virtue! Dharma! That is what the Sophists were teaching! Not
ethical relativism. Not pristine ``virtue.'' But areté. Excellence. Dharma!
Before the Church of Reason. Before substance. Before form. Before mind and
matter. Before dialectic itself. Quality had been absolute. Those first
teachers of the Western world were teaching Quality, and the medium they had
chosen was that of rhetoric. He has been doing it right all along."
(RMP,ZMM,Chapter 29)
"The reason there is a difference between individual evaluations of quality
is that although Dynamic Quality is a constant, these static patterns are
different for everyone because each person has a different static pattern of
life history. Both the Dynamic Quality and the static patterns influence his
final judgment. That is why there is some uniformity among individual value
judgments but not complete uniformity."
(RMP, SODV)
Buddhism is the home of relativism, since in a Buddhist view, there is no
absolute. Buddhist reality arises co-dependently. Everything then, is relative.
(http://www.buddhanet.net/cane-toads.htm
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/
