The "Bodvar by proxy" approach The "Bodvar by proxy" approach
The "Bodvar by proxy" approach,...... oops , did i just repeat myself all the time? Guess i did, strange, an echoe from Norway http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum Platt exploiting recuparguments. 2010/11/8 <[email protected]> > Hi Mark, All: > > Dynamic Quality isn't concept free. Once you name something, it becomes a > concept. But it's a concept like "ineffable" is a concept -- pointing to > something that cannot be defined. And that leaves intellect impotent. > Intellect > can only deal with defined terms. Pirsig admitted as much. But, he said go > ahead anyway: "Getting drunk and picking up bar-ladies and writing > metaphysics > is a part of life." (Lila, 5) So, yes. Even though we can't think about > DQ, go > ahead and think about it - another paradox illustrating critical thinking's > feet of clay. > > Platt > > > On 7 Nov 2010 at 19:09, 118 wrote: > > Hello Everyone, > I would disagree with the notion of keeping Dynamic Quality concept free. > This is similar to the religious concept of not worshiping false idols. > When the prophet told the worshipers of Allah to not make concepts of > their God, such a things was punishable by death. I do not think we need > to return there. Such a dictate does not work, and is counter to the > expansion of intellectual thought that may be happening through the > internet. > > Concepts are for manipulation, there should not be anything tabu about > them, > to say otherwise in not rational, and somewhat mystical. Such premises > would certainly not help expand the notion of Quality to others. If we try > to keep dynamic quality concept free, this will be at the expense of MOQ, > and is highly destructive. Progress is measured through the introduction > of > concepts. The last thing that I want to do is sit in a cave meditating on > dynamic quality without being able to think about it. > > Just my opinion, > Thank you all, > Mark > > > > Hi Ron > > > > Dynamic Quality is not meaningless... I am not sure where you get that > > idea. Dynamic Quality is what's better. > > > > Ron: > > > Killing intellectual patterns is useful in times of stuckness > > > when we are faced with gumption traps. The now of experience > > > simplifies meaning by returning to the root, through this we > > > often become unstuck in our thinking. > > > That is not reducing Dynamic quality to meaninlessnes or > > > relativism that is recognizing it as the source of meaning > > > the grounding of our intellectual patterns to the most meaningful. > > > > Dan: > > Dynamic Quality is not to be associated with relativism. You may have > > gotten that idea on account of our discussion on "betterness" and how > > that concept is dependent-arising. Please pay attention to the word > > concept. But remember, Dynamic Quality must be kept concept-free. As > > far as killing intellectual patterns, I am not sure that that is to be > > associated with Dynamic Quality either. This now of experience IS > > Dynamic Quality. The sorting that goes on after is where intelletual > > concepts arise. > > > > Thank you, > > > > Dan > > 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
