Hi Joe, I am also content to accept evolution as one of the highest working intellectual hypotheses. It's seems a might fine pattern.
Marsha On Dec 3, 2011, at 2:31 PM, Joseph Maurer wrote: > Hi Marsha and Mark, > > I do not know how you envision evolution, language? Pirsig changes the > status of "Quality" from a adjective, relative existence, in SOM to a noun, > DQ indefinable existence, in MOQ. > > What is the logic supporting this change? It can only be some change in a > reality of existence like evolution not simply definition since DQ/SQ > describes a metaphysics of existence, not simply a correction to SOM's real > and intentional existence in terms of quality. Are there adjectives, nouns > etc. in the MOQ? How does logic change from SOM to MOQ? > > For myself I am content to accept levels in existence, evolution, as a > reality of DQ/SQ metaphysics. > > Joe > > > > > On 12/2/11 11:39 PM, "MarshaV" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello Mark, > > I know you've said that you are sick of the sutras, but the Heart >> Sutra explains that 'Emptiness is form, form is emptiness'. I understand the >> relationship between DQ/sq to be the same. But this can be, should be, >> experienced not just conceptualized. There seems to be middle degrees >> between >> being a Buddha and being comatose or a newborn baby. It's been said by many >> that it is right there in front of you, something you've always known. And >> you don't need mind-altering drugs. Maybe it helps to find encouragement >> from >> someone we think we can trust, from someone whose explanation seems real >> enough to seem possible. > > But you think on it. And then stop thinking for >> long enough to see. > > > Marsha ___ 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
