Hi Mark Definitions and words are just patterns. However, THIS is Quality, in very High Definition: http://www.metoperafamily.org/opera/barber-of-seville-rossini-english-tickets.aspx
Wish you a good quality laugh. J A 27 sep 2012 kl. 01.10 skrev 118: > Hi Jan-Anders, > > Thank you for your input on this subject. I find this whole concept of not > describing (or defining as some people say) Quality to be a bit > nonsensical. If this were true, we would have a word (Quality) that cannot > be said to mean anything, yet Pirsig devotes two books to the subject. When > we bring up the word Quality we have a meaning in mind. Yet, there seem to > be those in this forum who claim that no meaning can be given to Quality. > > > > We use words to exchange ideas. These ideas are of something that is > important to us. The words we use to describe Quality are meant to convey > meaning to the reader. That is why we post in this forum, to discuss a > metaphysics based on Quality. In order to discuss Quality, we must use > words of agreed on definitions. In order to discuss Quality we must agree > on what it is that we are discussing. > > > > In its purest sense of the word, Quality is a manner of viewing existence. > It is a paradigm through which one can make meaning of the world. This is > explained to great length in Lila. The whole purpose of MOQ is to provide > meaning to Quality using metaphysical terms. What this brings, is an > awareness of existence which is outside subjects and objects. This must be > something we all are aware of; otherwise we would be discussing Quality as > if it were some foreign viewpoint. One has little to discuss about skiing, > unless one has been skiing. We are discussing what we are aware of through > the prism of Quality. This is really simple. > > > > It is clear from ZAMM, that to see the world as Quality, one enters into > the realm of insanity. Therefore, it could seem that trying to define > Quality is an exercise in insanity. However, this is not the case as is > shown by MOQ as presented in Lila. Quality is defined so many times in > Lila, that the book should be banned according to some. > > > > The little response provided by Jan Anders is completely useless in terms > of MOQ. It says that one cannot define Quality in the course of a > conversation. I have news for Jan Anders, there is absolutely nothing that > can be defined. Try defining your dog (if you have one), and I will show > you what you have left out. Definitions are merely agreements, words are > descriptons. There is nothing binding about definitions except their > utility. Quality is no different in it definability than anything else we > discuss. The problem seems to be that nobody can agree on Quality. All we > do is go around in circles doing our best not to talk about it, and somehow > deny Quality in MOQ. This is completely absurd. > > > > If I present an analogy between Quality and Intent, what I am doing is > saying that in my opinion, my awareness of Quality is similar to my > awareness of Intent. Neither of these terms needs to be forcefully defined > so long as I make clear what I mean. The whole purpose of such an exercise > is to bring meaning to Quality. It is to allow others to see existence in > a new way; a way that brings more meaning and makes more sense than we > currently have in the West. An awareness that we all have. An awarness > that is free from SOM. > > > > So, please, let's stop all this "non-defining" nonsense. Let us get back > to MOQ and discussing Quality. What words do you want to use to discuss > Quality? > > > How about it Jan Anders? Got something of substance to say about Quality? > Tell us of your experience of your examination of the World as Quality. > > > Regards, > > Mark > > > > > > On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Jan Anders Andersson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Mark > > If you don't mind I would like to split in here. Defining Quality is as > easy as defining a hole without mentioning what's around it, specially when > some says that it's all fluid. > > >> > 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
