Andre,

I take the two-view perspective of the MoQ.  There is the MoQ as the 
intellectual/conceptual metaphysical system, with all its examples and 
supporting explanation, which was presented by RMP in 'LILA' and with 
interviews, text and letters; and there is the MoQ as Reality = Quality 
(Dynamic/static), or as I prefer to think of it:  Value(unpatterned/patterned). 
 


Marsha 





On Oct 28, 2012, at 1:40 PM, Andre Broersen wrote:

> Marsha to Joe:
> I have the MoQ as Reality = Quality(Dynamic/static). There is no additional 
> 'something' called 'belief'.
> 
> Andre:
> Here Marsha clearly demonstrates her belief once again. She fails to 
> understand that the MoQ is NOT Reality. There is absolutely nothing RATIONAL 
> about her equation above. Rather she keeps on repeating her deep seated 
> BELIEF (ie her own socially patterned conviction) that this is indeed the 
> case. Hereby completely discarding Pirsig's own intellectual statment (see 
> paraphrased below).
> 
> Ah, the social vs the intellectual...and we have seen plenty of examples of 
> whose side Marsha barracks for. Marsha hates intellectuals. Yep, kill all 
> them intellectual patterns, yep...kill them all.
> 
> For goodness sake Marsha you must have learnt something in all these years. 
> But to learn something also involves the value of listening to others and 
> maybe even being open to learning from them.
> But that is something you refuse to do.
> 
> You keep on repeating Bodvar's illusion(!!)by equating the MoQ with Reality. 
> The MoQ is a static intellectual pattern of value. 'Quality' is NOT part of 
> the MoQ. The MoQ uses the referent term 'DQ' to REFER to Quality...to point 
> towards. If it were part of the MoQ it would become an intellectual chess 
> piece, it would be raped, torn apart, ridiculed and whatever.... as you and 
> some others here on this discuss keep on doing.
> 
> Pirsig is very adamant, clear and definite about this. It is important to 
> keep all concepts away from Quality...keep them out of the equation. As soon 
> as you do it is static.
> 
> For somebody who is trying to look at the MoQ through Buddhist eyes you are 
> making a fool of yourself, the MoQ and the rich philosophical tradition 
> called Buddhism, in all its variations.
> 
> You are not only confused...you really do not have a clue.
> 
> Now, I can anticipate your response. It'll be going something like 'la di da 
> di da'.
> 
> If you are going to respond, answer this very straightforward, clear, no bull 
> quaestion:
> 
> Do you believe that the MoQ=Reality?
> (this is not a misrepresentation of your statement above by the way. Just 
> answer the question)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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

Reply via email to