Comment from /A to Andre's post: Comment: That's looking from the inside of MoQ, and of course it would be right from that perspective, as MOQ only considers experience. If Ham, like me, is trying to consider MoQ in a wider context, as just one concept among many other concepts, the argument becomes invalid. But it's true that MoQ just considers experience and that the source then, of experience, would be experience itself and thus being self-sufficient. Inside the MoQ, the question concerning an external course would be invalid in the same way as the statement "This statement is false" would be invalid in formal logic.
Andre: Can you tell me /A what lies 'outside' the MOQ? What do you mean when you and Ham 'consider the MOQ in a wider context'? What 'reality' are you referring to that lies outside of experience. Is there something you are referring to that lies outside of cosmological evolution? If so, I am very interested to hear. Have you achieved a way of arriving at 'concepts' without experience? Have you arrived at concepts that have no value? Do you have any examples you'd like to share with us? It seems to me that when you say 'MOQ just considers experience', with your use of the term 'just' you are wiping out Pirsig's intention and achievement and completely misunderstand the MOQ. I really wonder what you are looking for here on this discuss. 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
