Hi dmb, Thank you for your responses. It is quite possible that we are speaking past each other from different perspectives. Let me just say, that I try to impart my perspective in a rational and logical way. Perhaps this is inadequate on my part. I sense that you are very comfortable with your beliefs, and filter them through your own experiences. How can you not. Perhaps my observations are a bit to "mystical" (no glamour intended). Let me just say, that there was a time when I was sure about what was real. I relegated beliefs in gods to a low understanding of reality, despite the acknowledgment of such existence by many great minds (much greater than mine). I was stuck in a comfortable perspective. There was a crack in the cosmic egg (if you will), and now I float. I wouldn't call my current perspective a religion, since there is no formed dogma. I would say, however, that from the point of view of belief, it is no different in expression from Pirsig's. It is an opinion after all. In that way, it is no different. Perhaps not to your taste. I do criticize the opinion that MoQ is the antidote to religion, since in my perspective I honestly do not see the difference. Such criticism is meant to smooth the hard edges of MoQ as being anti-. No, I do not believe Pirsig provides the same structure to Quality as I have derived from reading ZAMM, so it is not the same as my "religion."
If there is an accepted definition for mysticism this has to be imposed from the outside and not from the personal. Such a definition only provides a concept and not the real thing. I do believe I understand what mysticism is. I apologize if I have offended your beliefs in any way. Regards, Mark Mark responds to dmb: ...but as I recall, the statement was that we are all "children" of God in the same way we can say we are "children" of Quality. The differentiation of a mystic from the rest is difficult since it can be claimed that we are all mystics. If such a term is meant to denote somebody outside the norm, then I agree. Most of us are mystical about the same thing, which makes it commonly acceptable, but is nothing more than conventional mysticism. dmb says: "Children" is definitely not one of my favorite metaphors for humanity and don't much care for the implication that Quality is our "Father" either. The baggage that goes with it is overwhelming in it proportions. It doesn't help to blur the MOQ with Christianity, to say the least. And since the author is on the record about these two things already, it's intellectually naughty too. Also, I can see that you're not too clear on what mysticism is. Bet you'd find it quite interesting. The Stanford encyclopedia had a detailed, scholarly article that covers a whole range. They've probably improved since I read it about three years ago. If you're interested in Pirsig's ideas, this should really be helpful... http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mysticism/ Mark said: What I mean is constant comparisons that state that something is different from something else, when it is not. dmb says: Yea, I don't know what that was all about. But I do know that sometimes people are unable to detect real differences. And sometimes people see differences where there aren't any. Sometimes the difference is subtle yet very important. Sometimes the supposed difference is obvious to everyone and yet it doesn't amount to anything. McDonalds and Burger King are obviously different and yet they're exactly the same. If you can tell the difference between coke and pepsi (without the labels), you drink way too much soda. mark said: Quality is a belief system, it is no different. If MoQ were to progress by defining strict dogma (as is often done in these posts), then perhaps we could compare the MoQ to a coercive religion. Whether sunlight shines in or is shut out is a personal response. Pirsig obviously doesn't like the metaphysics present in some religions, but that is due to his personal interpretation. In every mode of thought, there are people who need to be told what to believe, and people who think for themselves. To relegate those in certain religions to the former is indeed a disservice promoted by Pirsig. dmb says: Well, he's certainly entitle to his personal interpretation of religion and it's quite okay for you to disagree. But if your claim is that the MOQ is not only a religion but the same as your religion, then you have distorted his interpretation to erase the same disagreement you just acknowledged. Dude, that's just not honest. If you're gonna be like that, I'm too interested in chatting. Sorry. _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390708/direct/01/ 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/
