The Holy Father to 'his' child: I think he should have left the "leading edge" as the DQ metaphor and the train the SQ ditto, not introduced a still bigger Quality that the DQ/SQ "rides on" ... the pesky QUALITY/MOQ meta-metaphysics again.
Andre: The 'pesky etc'is your invention Bodvar. If you mean Quality (dynamic) and the MoQ (a description of the presumed DQ/SQ 'interplay') then yes. Andre previously: So, from a static perspective you have the DQ/SQ interplay, the dance
of Lila. From a Dynamic perspective you have pure experience.DQ.
Bodvar Dynamic Quality (of the MOQ) is "pure experience", to postulate some Quality still more dynamic than DQ threatens the MOQ Andre: No one postulates another Quality. I was suggesting the 'view' of Quality from 2 different perspectives; the static one; the DQ/SQ dance of Lila and DQ. In direct experience there is no MoQ. The MoQ is a static, intellectual pattern of value because it is a high quality static description of conventional reality (the world of everyday affairs). I'll repeat one sentence for you Bodvar. I repeat it because you have avoided answering it previously: in direct experience there is no MoQ. You claim the MoQ= Reality. Thus you claim that the MoQ= direct experience. To avoid mis- understanding: the sign = means 'equivalent to'. The fallacy of this position should be obvious. Yet you maintain it. Quality cannot be 'contained' in any belief systems. It cannot be 'captured' in reports, tradition, hearsay, or any authority. Not even in a metaphysics. Mr. Pirsig is very, very clear about this. So what do ya reckon ol'man? Andre
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
