Hi , Arlo, superb stuff, good reflections, skillfull handling the material. You are already teaching a wide range of aspects of quality, showing that at least a number of these aspects are teachable. Come to think of it, you became part of what is written, part of the entity. Superb!. Adrie
2010/12/2 ARLO J BENSINGER JR <[email protected]> > [Mark] > I would have to say that S/O is the product of reflection. This is where > the > intellectual level in its static form comes in. That is, rules of > governance. > In its dynamic form, it is free from S/O. > > [Arlo] > Are you suggesting there are Dynamic intellectual patterns of value and > static > intellectual patterns of value? > > I think its more clear to say there is Dynamic Quality, and all stable > patterns > of emanating from this are what we consider "static patterns of value". > > Given this, the response to DQ can be inorganic, biological, social or > intellectual. > > [Mark] > So the question would be, do we let the static dominate the dynamic? I > would > say, that this will never work. > > [Arlo] > Would you say this is true of the social-biological boundary as well, that > static social patterns should not dominate biological patterns of value? > > [Mark] > Decisions made by the intellect are dynamic. Learning is dynamic. The > Academy > is static due to its dogma. > > [Arlo] > Adherence to "dogma" is not (1) exclusive to the Academy and (2) not > indicative > of the Academy. > > If we abolish the Academy, what do you propose would take its place? Do we > teach every possible theory or idea that comes along as equally valid? Do > we > more than a thousand times fold increase the amount of reading material by > having every possible "article" by anyone published? How do you propose we > discriminate? Do we at all? Should "Loose Changers" and "flat-earthers" be > given spots in the curriculum? > > If YOU were suddenly President of Academy University, what changes would > you > put into place. > > [Mark] > We do not want MOQ to go there. > > [Arlo] > Well, you, Marsha and Platt do not, but Pirsig, me, Ant, DMB, Horse, and > many > others do. > > [Mark] > I wouldn't say it is defective, I believe it is misinterpreted. > > [Arlo] > Are any of the other levels "misinterpreted"? > > [Mark] > Provision?? I can only say that intellect should be moral; morality does > not > have to be intellectual. > > [Arlo] > Intellectual patterns are moral patterns. "Morality" does not have to be > "intellectual", it can be social, biological or inorganic. But intellectual > patterns are morally superior to these others. > > [Mark] > This is the traditional Western view of Truth over Quality; we endeavor to > change this through MOQ and put Quality over Truth. > > [Arlo] > No one has ever proposed that Quality is subordinate to Truth. Indeed, I > doubt > anyone you are pointing to with this even thinks there is a "capital-T > Truth", > just provisionally truths as revealed via experience. > > > 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
