You are moving up to the use of third party scripts , handed over in the background of the listnoise.
I the distance , Mark, i can hear the orchestra playing on the deck of the sinking Titanic,.... You are on your own now, big boy,follow the light. 2010/11/8 118 <[email protected]> > > Hi Platt, > > Thank you for your patient response. I am here to discuss, not to > dictate. > > I agree, one must have a concept in order to discuss anything. Rational > > thought is symbol manipulation. Such symbols are also concepts. I also > > fully understand the ineffability of dynamic quality, and do not think > that > > such a thing is an insurmountable stumbling block. I am not bashing > dynamic > > quality by any stretch of the imagination. > > > > All concepts require some kind of jump as to their acceptance. We may > not > > realize this is what we are doing most of the time, due to > indoctrination. > > But such is the nature of agreement. Even Buddhist philosophy which is > > considered highly intellectual requires heavy indoctrination. This is > not a > > bad thing, since some concepts are not necessarily intuitive, and require > > much thinking along the appropriate lines (or path). Such thinking is > > provided conceptually. In the end, an awareness dawns that becomes > > fulfilling. Operating through that awareness can provide much meaning > and > > happiness. > > > > A rational inquiry into dynamic quality must go through this process. > The > > theistic camp often resorts (though lack of training, or for expediency) > to > > saying you just have to believe (become aware of) for conversion. > However, > > for those looking, there are plenty of rational arguments for the > existence > > of God, some based on paradoxes. The point is, MOQ, (IMO) states that > > rational arguments are needed to support the concept of dynamic quality. > > One must assemble this from all sides that can provide insight. > Building a > > metaphysics is not easy, and as Pirsig notes, such construction can be > self > > destructive due to the nature of such inquiry. > > > > Through such rational leading, the individual becomes aware of dynamic > > quality, and the actual arguments do not matter so much once the switch > is > > flipped (if you will), unless, of course, he wants to convince another. > In > > my opinion, Phaedrus underwent a sudden epiphany and is trying to convert > it > > to words. He does this remarkably well as is evidenced by the success of > > ZMM. Lila is more for those who have already got it. > > > > It is this awareness that we are after, getting there can be hard, but > must > > be supportive and not doctrinal. Using analogies to other forms of > thought > > is appropriate if that helps create such awareness. There are thousands > > upon thousands of pages of Vedic thought. These are metaphysical > arguments. > > In the end however, one must bring in Gods. The belief of such things > is > > arrived at through rational discussion, which becomes more abstract the > > farther you get into it. Once accepted, it becomes a whole different > ball > > game. > > > > To begin dynamic quality with the dictate that we cannot describe it, is, > > in my opinion, not a very fruitful one. There will not be many takers > that > > can accept such a thing in the same way that many do not subscribe to the > > dictates of religion. All of these are a search for a personally > meaningful > > reality. Such a reality can be arrived at through rational persuasion. > > That is the nature of metaphysics, of all kinds. Even Kierkegaard whom > I > > regard to be an amazing thinker understands that jumps are necessary. > One > > must prepare for the jump, however, and not be told to do so by a drill > > sergeant. Jumps happen spontaneously once the brain is ready. Some get > > there easier than others, some have more need than others. However, many > of > > us do not like being told what to think. > > > > Let me emphasize that this is not MOQ bashing, Quality was part of what > > saved my life. I arrived at it in the most desperate way. This is also > not > > Pirsig bashing, the tools of metaphysics are what he uses. It is simply > an > > opinion by one person who is interested in the spread of MOQ as a useful > > metaphysics. If one sees quality in everything, tolerance and > appreciation > > result. It is a move away from negative thinking to one full of > surprises > > and miracles. > > > > Cheers, > > Mark > > > > > >> > > > 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
