Hi Marsha,
> Greetings, > > Definition, connotation and history are intricately involved with patterning, > and since the definition, connotation and history of the God-pattern is > associated with "an evil social suppression of intellectual and Dynamic > freedom" it should be dropped. Quality as presented in the Moq is a much > better (untainted) label. Steve: I think this is true to what Pirsig was saying in the annotations. But I also think this from Walter Kaufman's introduction to Buber's "I and Thou" is consistent with the MOQ: "[W]hy use religious terms? Indeed, it might be better not to use them because they are always misunderstood. But what other terms are there? We need a new language, and new poets to create it, and new ears to listen to it. Meanwhile, if we shut our ears to the old prophets who still speak more or less in the old tongues, using ancient words, occasionally in new ways, we shall have very little music. We are not so rich that we can do without tradition. Let those who have new ears listen to it in a new way." A less lofty example is the homosexual's reclaiming of the word "queer." This word should have been dropped as a tool of social oppression, but better yet, it was reclaimed as a source of unity and pride. Personally, I don't generally find use for the word God for talking about my experience because I would be misunderstood to be referring to a supernatural diety external to the universe, but not everyone uses the word theistically, and I have no argument with those who use it to talk about DQ, love, The Tao, the ground of being, our hopes for the future of humankind, etc. 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/md/archives.html
