Hi Joe, My mistake, I meant OQ, that is something existing Outside of Quality. The "definitions" within mathematics are equalities. That is 1+1=2; this means that 1+1 and 2 are EXACTLY the same thing. This means that definition has nothing to do with it, except to perform mathematical logic. Both sides can be undefined and still be exactly the same (is there a definition for "2" that does not reference some other made up concept? I do not think so).
As I have said previously, ultimately there is not anything that can be defined, just like DQ. All we have are conventions so that one person has an understanding what the other person is talking about. These "definitions" are entered into by agreement, not by some fundamental nature of the thing. There are not enough words to define "tree", yet we can agree what a tree is. If there were a strict definition for Tree, everytime I looked at one I would have to be thinking the same way about it. The same is true for DQ and everything else. There is nothing special about DQ in terms of how it is defined. It is a matter of convention. This just takes effort, and should not be simply dismissed as impossible. Elsewise it will be lost forever. This is why I do not know what you mean by "undefined". Pirsig spent at least a whole book defining Quality. That is, he presents words and analogies to give us an idea of what he is conceptualizing. When you say that DQ is undefined, I would simply say that everything else is too. One of the problems with Western Thought is that the assumption is that True definitions do exist. MoQ tries to reverse that, or at least balance it. It is easy to get caught up in words and concepts and believe that something fundamental is being proposed based on some underlying truth. However, according to MoQ, this is not the case. What we have is Quality, and rhetorical discussions based on it. No Strict unbending Definitions are required; however, agreement is possible. Hey, what is "LE" by the way? Cheers, Mark On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Joseph Maurer <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Mark, > > I assume OA means outside of anything. That is a metaphysical discussion > since mathematics is not OA but ID inside the defined. The metaphysics of > evolution is OD outside the defined since it is a description of LE levels > in existence. > > Joe > > > On 11/17/11 11:26 AM, "118" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> If evolution is taken in its scientific sense, it implies the interplay >> between the "environment", and the subject evolving. This is known as >> natural >> selection. Using this concept, Quality is presenting itself as the result of >> something outside of quality (OQ). If this is the case, then the nature of >> OA >> should be discussed. > > > 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
