Andre,
----- Original Message ---- From: Andre Broersen <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sat, April 23, 2011 4:00:36 AM Subject: Re: [MD] Free Will Ron previously to Andre: Pragmatically Andre, DQ being understood as undefined betterness is more useful than insisting that it remain unconceptualized. Andre then: Yes and no Ron. I sympathize with Pirsig when he argues that we should keep all concepts out of DQ. 'Concepts are always static. Once they get into dynamic Quality they'll overrun it and try to present it as some kind of concept itself'( Anthony's PhD, p 35). Andre now: And I should have added: 'So what Phaedrus was saying was that not just life, but everything, is an ethical activity. It is nothing else. When inorganic patterns of reality create life the Metaphysics of Quality postulates that they've done so because it is 'better' and that this definition of 'betterness'- this beginning response to Dynamic Quality- is an elementary unit of ethics upon which all right and wrong can be based.(LILA, p 161) I take this to mean that 'betterness' can be defined as a 'beginning response to DQ', a 'loosening', a 'weakening', 'challenging' or sometimes having a possible 'disintegrating' effect on static patterns of value. The rightness or wrongness is either considered immediately or centuries later. Seems to me that this ties our views together quite nicely Ron: DQ remains unconceptualized and be considered undefined betterness. The 'elementary unit of ethics' is based on 'this beginning response' to DQ and not on DQ itself. Does this sound okay to you? Ron: I think it ties everything together in a continious system of thought yet leaves it open ended to change. It has meaning yet remains an undefined meaning. When we discuss DQ we must conceptualize a meaning, It bears the most fruit and supplies the greatest explanation as betterness but it comes with the caveat that it is an undefined betterness. It solves the problem of relativism, yes, there are many truths, but some truths are better than others. It is the elementary unit of ethics on which all reality rests apon. This has huge consequences over Nihlism over no choice and relativistic meaninglessness. Thus, from an MoQ perspective, "betterness" is the elementary unit of meaning of all static patterns of value migrating towards DQ. We may not say or know anything else about DQ, DQ from a static perspective is therefore undefined betterness. As this relates to Aristotle and Socrates, Dialectic reduced concepts to relativistic meaninglessness. Aristotle stated that it ignored the good, that from the good all meaning springs. Thnx for taking up the conversation Andre, I feel it is an important one for the 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 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
