Hi Steve and all, Metaphysics is about the indefinable DQ and SQ. The intellectual level covers SQ very well. Physics describes the definable SQ. Physics depends on definitions for the logical explanation of reality. If you experience logic you have to experience definitions.
Pirsig proposed DQ/SQ for the metaphysics of reality. Physics cannot describe the metaphysics DQ/SQ. Physics uses a SOM mathematical logic for its metaphysics, and Ham proposes Essence. I don't expect you will be able to define Love, Joy, Sadness, Happiness, but that does not prevent the experience of emotions. As intelligent representatives of biological reality, life, a great deal is inexplicable and the DQ/SQ description for metaphysics, indicates that distinguishing undefined DQ as an element of reality in our experience is necessary. About the most indistinguishable aspect of my reality that I experience is emotions. That is why I describe them as DQ. There is no definition for Love, Joy, Anxiety, etc.. There is no place in SOM to describe them as reality. You"ll know them when you experience (see) them. They don't stand alone. I describe emotions as a DQ only level in evolution. I am aware of them, but I am unable to define them. Biological beings like germs and animals like livestock, do not display emotions, only defined reactions to their environment. If indefinable DQ is not knowable then a metaphysics of DQ/SQ are illogical. On 7/9/11 2:01 PM, "Steven Peterson" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Joe, > > > On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Joseph Maurer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Emotions are DQ only. > > On the contrary in LC Pirsig says, "The MOQ sees emotions as a > biological response to quality..." > > As I see it it emotions play the role on the biological level that > carbon plays on the inorganic level and language plays on the social > level in being that pattern that offers the versatility and stability > needed for the next level to evolve. Now that's just my view, and I > don't know whether Pirsig would agree or disagree, but your statement > about emotions being DQ rather than some type of pattern is > specifically contradicted by Pirsig. Whatever you were talking about > in your last post just isn't the philosophy of RMP, aka the MOQ. > > Best, > Steve > 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
