Mark, How far down would you like the explanation to go? Should I take it all the way down to 'not this, not that' or stop at some arbitrary level of your choosing?
Marsha On Jun 28, 2012, at 6:10 PM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I am not quite sure what you mean by monistic. Could you explain this > a bit more? > > What does it mean to you if something is hypothetical? Is it used as > "a possilble truth"? Or, are you using the word differently? What > does it mean that knowledge is hypothetical? I think I am missing > your point (hypothetically that is). > > M > On 6/28/12, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Greetings, >> >> First, I do believe I was writing about the MOQ being monistic, where >> reality, the world, is said to be nothing but value. Second, I changed the >> word I used for expanded rationality for hypothesis to hypothetical. >> >> >> Marsha. >> >> >> >> On Jun 28, 2012, at 1:37 PM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Ron, >>> >>> First of all, Marsha considers any knowledge to be a hypothesis. A >>> hypothesis is a form of knowledge. This would make knowledge of >>> something a form of knowledge. Anyone can see that this is simply a >>> play on words, and will not lead anywhere. >>> >>> For Quality to be a monism, it must be conjectured to exist as an >>> entity, as described by Marsha as "the source of all that exists". >>> That is, it must exist separate from "all that exists". I do not >>> believe that this is a useful interpretation of Quality, for then we >>> revert to religious aspects of such metaphysics. >>> >>> Others, including myself, have suggested that Quality is "The Event". >>> That is, it does not underlie any static phenomena, but is the process >>> of such phenomena. This Event is occurring in the present tense. An >>> event can have a tendency, and in MoQ this tendency is "betterness". >>> In Taoism this "event" can be translated as "The Way", which reading >>> of the Tao Te Ching will reveal (if read in that way). The tendency >>> of the Way is to defy resistance. One issue in the modern world is >>> that we tend to embrace resistance. >>> >>> By describing Quality as the cause of results, we are not left with >>> anything static to hold on to. One can personalize such Quality by >>> describing it as an Intention, or a Relationship. A relationship >>> exists between two things (for example), but is NOT either of those >>> things. In fact, one can simply turn the logic and say that the >>> relationship CREATES the two things. I have brought this in to the >>> discussion a number of times; one time poetically by describing >>> Quality as "the golden threads" that lie between, create, and holds >>> together. In another analogy which I have used, Quality is like the >>> "event" of lava pouring through a fissure. Always coming anew and >>> building. Not to be taken literally of course. >>> >>> When I explain Quality to others around here, I have found that by >>> using the "event" metaphor, those listening can intuitively grasp what >>> I am presenting, and stay away from the concept of monism. I am not >>> sure if this is useful to you. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> On 6/28/12, X Acto <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Marsha had stated to Joe: >>>> >>>> The context for my comment was quite an indictment of the intellect's >>>> shortcomings by Schopenhauer. I think, though, that the value can be >>>> improved if the dualism implied by knowledge-of-some-thing is understood >>>> and >>>> remains as hypothetical. The MoQ is afterall a monism (with Quality the >>>> source of all that exists.) At its highest, static (patterned) quality >>>> may >>>> represent the best value available at the moment, but it does have its >>>> fallibilities At least, imho. >>>> >>>> >>>> Ron asks: >>>> Some questions directed at Ant- >>>> >>>> Is Quality a Monism? firstly, it should be clear we are speaking of >>>> static >>>> quality and when we are speaking >>>> of monads we are speaking about unity, oneness, whole. It tends to lend >>>> to >>>> the idea of completeness. >>>> >>>> The encapsulization as it were. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> .. >>>> 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
