Well, yes. That is what I was addressing too. Anyway... did I mention I never much liked bananas? :)
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 3:44 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Dan, > > To should have written: There is unpatterned, non-dualistic experience, and > that is what I was addressing. > > > Thank you, > > Marsha > > > > > On Mar 1, 2013, at 3:30 AM, Dan Glover <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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. > > Dah... All words are static quality representation! > > > >> "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] > > "But with a Metaphysics of Quality the empirical experience is not an > experience of 'objects.' It's an experience of value patterns produced by a > number of sources, not just inorganic patterns." > > (RMP, 'LILA', Chapter 26) > > This quote is of course beyond your point, but an interesting statement to > consider in regards to "experiencing" static patterns. > > > >> So, within the context of the MOQ, to say we experience Dynamic >> Quality is a bit of a misnomer. No? > > No, not in my experience. There is unpatterned, non-dualistic experience, > and that is what I was addressing. > > > > > Marsha > > > >> 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
