motion is a facet of the physikal reality 2010/11/7 118 <[email protected]>
> Hi Adrie, > Thanks for that. I guess the premise is whether, reality is motionless or > not. Certainly through a view of SOM and Cause/Effect, reality appears to > be in motion. At least that would be the perception. Zeno was not looking > at people walking and such, but at underlying paradoxes, which is also an > appropriate inquiry. He may be pointing more to the inability of logic to > provide description to reality. As such, the use of motion is incomplete, > and paradoxical. > > So my question to your Adrie, is whether you consider Quality to be in > motion or not. I believe this is an appropriate question and cannot simply > be dismissed with the statement that Quality cannot be defined. I am > asking > for an opinion, as such it does not impose rigid definitive qualities. So > is Quality in motion or not? Those are the only two answers to choose > from. > If Quality equals reality as has been suggested then Quality is in motion. > This would indeed be an important premise that we can discuss through the > request for more details on the nature of this motion. Remember that I am > not asking about dynamic quality (DQ). > > What say you about this detail? > > By the way, my bird is from the Windup Bird Chronicle, by Murakami. Good > book, give it a read if you have a chance, it may have been translated into > Flemish, or Dutch, or French. > > Cheers, > Mark > > On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 1:14 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > (Adrie] > > > > > Zam, Page 219 > > quote > > "The followers of Heraclitus insisted the immortal priciple > > was change and motion. > > But Parmenides'disciple, Zeno,proved trough a series of > > paradoxes that any perception of motion and change is illusory. > > Reality had to be motionless."end. > > > > ------------------------------ > > ---nothing changed > > > > comment, already here in zam Pirsig recognised that Zeno > > made a capital mistake. > > reality cannot be motionless. > > > > from this moment on, Pirsig will fight this static interpretation > > in all of his following work. > > > > What was Zeno's mistake? well this, > > "proved trough a series of paradoxes that any perception...etc" > > > > The error is a false observation from Zeno,a contaminated one, > > and Pirsig recognised it. > > > > > > He is dealing with it in the quote from the moq and time > > i presented, > > > > But in the metaphysiks of Quality itself he is shredding this to > > > > pieces totally. > > > > We have to pay attention , Mark, there are no unimportant details. > > "Attention", the bird says.. > > > > > > > > > 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 > -- parser 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
