Hello Mark,
I'm sticking with DQ as indivisible, undefinable and unknowable. Experienced,
but unknowable. DQ is without differentiation, so no-thing to know and no one
to know it. Static quality (patterns) are knowable.
Alan Watts was cool.
The rest of your comments don't resonate with me, but as always I find your
point-of-view interesting.
Marsha
On Aug 13, 2011, at 11:16 AM, 118 wrote:
> Hi Marsha,
> I don't quite understand your first paragraph, so I will reply with
> thoughts on the second. In my opinion, those adjectives with which
> you define DQ are all related to sq. DQ is known by your entire
> being, that is: the body/brain, and, the mind or soul or Atman or
> spirit (everything that is not physical, which is much more
> encompassing than the physical). You are referring to the "knowing"
> that is done for the purposes of communication within the Social
> Level. Surely there are many things that you experience that cannot
> be put into words. Possibly most of your present experience.
>
> In my opinion, Goodness starts at zero and grows to infinity. There
> is no Badness per se in this type of analysis. We can also assign a
> midpoint in Quality, one side being positive and one side being
> negative, it all amounts to the same thing. This midpoint is useful
> for communication since it is easier to say Bad than "less good". I
> agree that this continuum is important to develop a language around
> perhaps with firmer meaning. If we assume that everything is Quality,
> then our whole perspective on life changes, we simply endeavor for
> higher Quality rather than trying to avoid a negative apparition.
>
> It's All Good,
> Mark
>
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 12:43 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> I am removing the 'Thinking:' from the subject line because it referenced a
>> previous line of thought and my changing a word in the definition of sq from
>> 'interonnected' to 'conditionally co-dependent'. It did not signify a
>> relationship between 'thinking' and my definitions of either DQ or sq.
>>
>> I'm sticking with DQ being indivisible, undefinable and unknowable. DQ is
>> without differentiation, so by what can it possibly be known? What can be
>> known is static quality (patterns) whether inside or outside of "intellect".
>>
>> From one point-of-view static patterns are all Goodness, from another they
>> are a mixed bag. Either way I wouldn't want to be without them, though I
>> think humanity could be helped by having them better understood.
>>
>> Marsha
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 13, 2011, at 2:07 AM, 118 wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Marsha,
>>> For me it is much simpler.
>>>
>>> SQ is the "patterns" that we form with our brains. It provides a
>>> meaningful way for us to intellectually interact with that outside of
>>> each of us.
>>>
>>> DQ is not intellectually "knowable" since that makes it sq. But it is
>>> known by all of us outside of the intellect (most of what we go though
>>> is outside of thought, only a little bit is converted to sq). Again,
>>> dividing DQ relegates it to sq, but it is continuously being divided
>>> by us outside of the intellect, for that is how we survive, the brain
>>> comes afterward to justify how we survive. And yes, it is definable,
>>> that is all that we do in this forum, create circular tautologies: DQ
>>> is that which forms sq; DQ is reality; DQ is dynamic; DQ is that which
>>> is Quality but not sq; DQ creates the appearance that sq is
>>> ever-changing, conditionally codependent and impermanent, etc. DQ
>>> give the appearance of predictablility in sq when subjected to the
>>> patterns created by the intellect. That is just circular referencing.
>>>
>>> In the end, all sq that we discuss is created by man, it does not
>>> exist outside of our minds. It is like making constellations out of
>>> the stars. Now those constellations are very real for us until we
>>> realize that we are just making them up. This is no different from
>>> everything else. This of course does not minimize sq, in fact it
>>> makes it Grand, Special, and the Greatest attribute of Man. It
>>> results in music, poetry, and, yes, Metaphysics. It is the complex
>>> glue that binds us humans together as a single organism. What more
>>> can we ask for? All else is simply delusion.
>>>
>>> If we look for DQ we loose it, a finger cannot point to itself, a
>>> motorcycle cannot ride itself. If we do not look for DQ we know that
>>> it is there.
>>>
>>> We create SQ, DQ creates us, both together form Quality.
>>>
>>> At least it is simple for me. I like simple for a simple brain.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:54 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For me…
>>>>
>>>> Dynamic Quality is indivisible, undefinable and unknowable.
>>>>
>>>> Static patterns of value are processes: ever-changing, conditionally
>>>> co-dependent and impermanent. (Not independent objects, subjects or
>>>> things-in-themselves.) Ever-changing processes that pragmatically tend to
>>>> persist and change within a stable, predictable pattern.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 7, 2011, at 8:37 AM, MarshaV wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> H Mark,
>>>>>
>>>>> I suppose I am picking nits in a way that matters to no one else, but I
>>>>> need to drop both causality and connectedness which seem both to require
>>>>> some intrinsic nature. At the moment I like better 'conditionally
>>>>> co-dependent'.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Marsha
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 6, 2011, at 12:15 PM, MarshaV wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Simply causal? I still could wonder how anything that lacks intrinsic
>>>>>> nature could possibly causally connect? What kind of connection would
>>>>>> that be? MMK - Chapter One kind of question...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marsha
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 6, 2011, at 11:47 AM, 118 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is simply a causal connection. As such it goes from
>>>>>>> undifferentiated (Quality) to highly differentiated (language). Please
>>>>>>> note that language results in perceived Quality.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mark
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Aug 5, 2011, at 1:21 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of course, I could wonder how anything that lacks intrinsic nature
>>>>>>>> could possibly connect? What kind of connection would that be? (I
>>>>>>>> can hear my mother's words: "Marsha, you think too much!")
>>>>>>>> Undifferentiated, and non-rational, and free from assimilation,
>>>>>>>> discrimination, analysis and synthesis? Or seeing without anything
>>>>>>>> seen?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Boggles the thinking mind...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Aug 5, 2011, at 3:56 AM, MarshaV wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Interconnected?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Marsha
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Aug 4, 2011, at 3:52 PM, 118 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There is a way to make this, understandable. Language results from
>>>>>>>>>> thinking, thinking results from awareness, awareness results from
>>>>>>>>>> dualism, dualism results from quality, quality results from Quality,
>>>>>>>>>> Quality results from language.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>> 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
>>
> 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
