Hi Marsha, This is not a forum of experience, this forum is to discuss MoQ. If indeed your posts are just relating a personal experience, then that clarifies why you post the way you do. So in response to your posts I can pay your head and say "that's nice Marsha, thanks for sharing" and then I can get back to MoQ.
I take it from your response that this is what you want. So I say "I am proud of you for believing in Emptiness" and I mean it, please carry on. Sent laboriously from an iPhone, Mark On Dec 17, 2011, at 10:02 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Mark: > > On Dec 17, 2011, at 11:52 AM, 118 wrote: > >> Hi Marsha, >> Yes, they are both presentations of Quality. For the purposes of >> metaphysical presentation they are separated as DQ and sq. this is what MoQ >> is, and this is what this forum is about. If you choose not to discuss MoQ, >> that is fine, but it does not help to short-circuit the metaphysics which >> Pirsig presents. If you find no value in discussing DQ and sq as different, >> then what kind of structure do you use for MoQ? It would seem that you are >> not interested in MoQ. So, my question is: Do you think that the >> distinction between DQ and sq is a useful presentation for discussion? If >> not, I will not bother you with it. > > > Marsha: > Since I have presented my definition of static patterns of value and of the > 'self' within the MoQ, it should seem obvious that I find it useful. > > Static patterns of value are processes: conditionally co-dependent, > impermanent, ever-changing and conceptualized. (Not independent objects, > subjects or things-in-themselves.) Ever-changing processes that > pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable > pattern. These patterns are categorized into a four-level, evolutionary, > hierarchical structure: inorganic, biological, social and intellectual. > > The “self” is a flow of ever-changing, conditionally co-dependent and > impermanent, static patterns of inorganic, biological, social and > intellectual value in the infinite field of Dynamic Quality. > > These definitions, though, do not alter my understanding that static quality > is not other than Dynamic Quality. This is what I experience, take it or > leave it. > > > Marsha > > > > >> >> Thanks >> >> Sent laboriously from an iPhone, >> Mark >> >> On Dec 16, 2011, at 7:40 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Mark, >>> >>> For me, static quality is not other than Dynamic Quality. But, of course, >>> that is based as much on experience as what I've read & how I've understood >>> and integrated that understanding. There were no questions within your >>> post so thanks for responding. >>> >>> >>> Marsha >>> >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>> On Dec 16, 2011, at 5:07 PM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Marsha, >>>> I am glad that it has been established for you. Personally I do not >>>> see Quality as being the same thing as Emptiness, but, of course, we >>>> each have our own realities. DQ is a subset of Quality and is created >>>> for the purposes of presentation. In this sense DQ is not the same as >>>> Quality, and both cannot be considered Emptiness in the same way. I >>>> suppose from this Pirsigian metaphysical division of DQ and sq, DQ >>>> would be one form of Emptiness according to you and Anthony. Since >>>> Quality can never be defined and can only be represented, each >>>> representation may be different. I suppose the usefulness comes in as >>>> to what this vision does for one. >>>> >>>> The term Emptiness also has different connotations to each person and >>>> can never be presented as dogmatic. Not having inherent existence is >>>> one of a number of possible presentations. It is interesting that in >>>> your quote the author states that Emptiness is "beyond the common >>>> worldly understanding", which implies it lies within an "uncommon >>>> worldly understanding". Perhaps that is what I have. >>>> >>>> Thank you for your response, I am still learning what people "see" in >>>> terms of Quality. >>>> >>>> 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
