Hi Joe, Undefinable and definable as opposite appearances can have different meanings depending on what wants to get out of it, in my opinion.
With reference to MOQ, I take home the following. Definable is something that is easy to share with words. An example would be "chair". To present something as undefinable means that it cannot be easily shared with words. Examples here would be "God", or "love". It is possible to share the undefinable if two people have experienced the same thing. Then words can bring meaning, and the undefinable becomes definable. If one has the experience of Quality, then a number of words or phrases can be used. However if one only sees Quality objectively, then words are misleading. To claim that DQ is undefinable simply means that one has no awareness of what it brings, and therefore has no words to express it. MOQ teaches a method to be aware of existence through Quality. It presents examples which, if contemplated, can provide such awareness. Once that awareness is achieved, the words become trivial. For example I can provide any number of words to describe skiing. But unless somebody has been skiing, these words remain just words. For the uninitiated, skiing remains undefinable. For me it has nothing to do with range, it is more about appreciation. Any definition is insufficient. Definitions are approximations who's only purpose is to transfer meaning. Meaning is undefinable, yet it can be achieved through words. That is one of the powers of words. It has been demonstrated that once a deaf person learns sign language their life becomes more colorful and meaningful. This is the power of sharing. There is nothing wrong with the definable, it is simply a tool. It is how it is used that is important. What was once undefinable is now definable. The is a grand ability of Man. Just because something is definable does not make it commonplace unless we become bewitched by words and think that they are more than tools. Most of our thoughts are wordless unless we are planning to share something or assimilate something. Words are temporary. It is what happens before and after words that provides meaning. We cannot say that anything is only the words used to describe it. Your idea of "chair" is different from mine since we have different experiences of such a thing. When I use such a word it is simply because it is a useful tool. Don't be afraid to describe something, it does not destroy it. Quality is like... Cheers, Mark Mark On Aug 20, 2012, at 11:26 AM, Joseph Maurer <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Mark and All, > > Pirsig proposes a metaphysics of DQ indefinable and SQ definable. > Definition must have some meaning to separate DQ/SQ. > > For myself I accept DQ as indefinable and SQ as definable. Since the > definable has a greater range than the indefinable I would expect SQ to have > a greater degree of certainty than DQ and in terms of levels in evolution SQ > defines a more far reaching reality than DQ. > > Joe > > > On 8/19/12 8:08 AM, "118" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Metaphysics can use physics for its presentation. SQ is as undefinable as >> DQ. >> It is a creation of ours. > > > 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
