Mark, I believe that 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. And I really dig that DQ. You can believe that.
Marsha On Dec 23, 2011, at 1:19 AM, 118 wrote: > Marsha, the opposite of a pattern is you. Believe in yourself. > > Sent laboriously from an iPhone, > Mark > > On Dec 22, 2011, at 7:37 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Tuukka, >> >> Unfortunately, I do not understand what you are presenting. I do not have a >> familiarity with the terms as you are using them. I understand we all might >> find different aspects of the MoQ important, and may approach that interest >> from different points-of-view. Broadly, I tend to want to consider a >> pattern from a position of its opposite. That allows for the widest range >> of possibilities for individual instances and the most dynamic >> point-of-view. But that's just my opinion. Bottomline, for me, is that >> Reality = Experience(patterned experience/unpatterned experience). I think >> to categorize patterns into the four-level, evolutionary, hierarchical >> structure: inorganic, biological, social and intellectual is brilliant, >> rational, modern, and suggests a way to bridge Western science with Eastern >> wisdom. But this is only my own perspective. >> >> But that's enough of me repeating my point-of-view once again, to the point >> of ad nauseam some would say. Hopefully as you continue to present your >> point-of-view it wll become bstter understood. >> >> >> Marsha >> >> >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Dec 22, 2011, at 9:10 AM, Tuukka Virtaperko <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Marsha, >>> >>> I agree. I'd say Pirsig's patterns are descriptive abstractions of >>> conventional-habitual experience. >>> >>> I also think that conventional-habitual experience is the same as romantic >>> quality. >>> >>> But because Pirsig's patterns are an analogy of conventional-habitual >>> experience, I think they do not include normative things such as formal >>> logic and axiomatic mathematics. To be sure, such formal constructs may be >>> derived from Pirsig's patterns, but once that has been done, they are >>> inherently independent of experience. >>> >>> In other words, I believe it's possible to construct a normative set of >>> patterns which is an analogy of Pirsig's patterns, but not the same thing. >>> >>> 1. The fundamental normative pattern is the /existence pattern/. It >>> contains all existing entities, such as symbols and their basic >>> relations. >>> 2. From the existence pattern emerges the /increment pattern/. This >>> pattern includes all existing structures that can have duplicates or >>> iterations. It contains variables and coefficients. >>> 3. From the increment pattern emerges the /interaction pattern/. That >>> pattern includes all rules regarding what kind of increments are >>> possible and what are not. It contains functions and topology. >>> 4. From the interaction pattern emerges the /control pattern/, which >>> contains rules on what can be stated of interactions and what can >>> not be stated. It contains things like axiomatization and completeness. >>> >>> >>> -Tuukka >>> >>> >>> >>> 22.12.2011 13:29, MarshaV kirjoitti: >>>> Hi Mark, >>>> >>>> I see patterns, of which words and definitions are an aspect, to all be >>>> analogy for conventional-habitual experience. >>>> >>>> >>>> Marsha >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPad >>>> >>>> On Dec 21, 2011, at 11:40 PM, 118<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Marsha, >>>>> OK I see how you are using analogy. I would use the word symbolism. >>>>> There, there was no complaint there, I must be improving my attitude. >>>>> Thanks for pointing it out. >>>>> >>>>> Sent laboriously from an iPhone, >>>>> Mark >>>>> >>>>> On Dec 20, 2011, at 11:05 PM, MarshaV<[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Dec 21, 2011, at 1:19 AM, 118<[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Marsha, >>>>>>> I am not griping, I am just talking. Settle down, I am not out to get >>>>>>> you. My only point was that non-duality is a word which we give the >>>>>>> idea that there is no "other". >>>>>> And I don't think you're out to get me, you just tend towards complaint. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> An analogy is when we represent something with a similar thing. >>>>>>> Something that is hard to describe is presented as something that is >>>>>>> similar. >>>>>> >>>>>> I used 'nonduality' as similar to a type of experience. But >>>>>> explanation, too, with its use of signs and symbols (words) is the use >>>>>> of analogies all the way down. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> 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
