We 'experience' Dynamic Quality all the time. The thing is, the term experience is a static quality representation of that which cannot be fully defined even though we define 'it' all the time.
"In a subject-object metaphysics, this experience is between a preexisting object and subject, but in the MOQ, there is no pre-existing subject or object. Experience and Dynamic Quality become synonymous." [Robert Pirsig, Lila's Child] So, within the context of the MOQ, to say we experience Dynamic Quality is a bit of a misnomer. No? On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:59 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Greetings All, > > Just for the record, I am not confining the term 'process' to _words_. > Taste, feel, sight, smell and sound are all process too. imho. So I might > suggest that an experience of Dynamic Quality might seem like a mental > version of 'white noise'. Nothing divisible, nothing definable and nothing > knowable > > > Marsha > > > > On Feb 27, 2013, at 7:41 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Hi David, >> >> Perhaps experienced, but not yet processed. >> >> >> Marsha >> >> >> >> On Feb 27, 2013, at 5:36 PM, "David Morey" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Marsha >>> >>> If DQ is unique (patternless) it cannot be divided into anything else, it >>> cannot be defined in relation >>> to anything else, but we can surely know it via experience I would suggest. >>> What do >>> you think? http://www.danglover.com 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
