So you do not experience chànge ? Iguess it's degenerate? MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >Marsha: >My static term for 'Dynamic Quality' is unpatterned. Unpatterned, as in not >divisible, not definable, not knowable, without boundaries, 'not this, not >that'. Unpatterned, as in no-thing, or pattern, to change. Dmb's statement >"DQ, or reality itself is ever-changing. That's what 'dynamic' means" is >contrary to RMP saying that 'change' "is probably the first concept emerging >from this Dynamic experience..." > >Your feedback doesn't match my experience. It is not a workable explanation. > > >Marsha > > > >On May 31, 2013, at 10:34 AM, X Acto <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >>> dmb says: >>> The contradiction is both clear and epic. >>> Where Pirsig says, "the world is primarily a moral order" and "value is the >>> fundamental ground-stuff of the world," DJH says, "All things are >>> mystically degenerate". >> >> Marsha: >> This is much like the contradiction where RMP says "Change is probably the >> first concept emerging from this Dynamic experience...", dmb says "DQ, or >> reality itself is ever-changing. That's what "dynamic" means". >> >> >> [Ron sez] >> The problem is applying this concept cross-contextualy. Dave is correct when >> he states that when we are dealing with meaning >> we are dealing with static concepts, the concept of "change" is descriptive >> of Dynamic experience, if we are trying to define >> DQ in any general way it is probably in this concept of "change" or "flux" >> because quite simply a metaphysics needs a pointer >> a place holder for the real DQ of the experiential "now". It is a frame of >> reference in which his entire explanation is centered >> around. Therefore Dynamic means "change" it's how we understand the "now" >> portion of experience in broad generalization. >> The explanation of "change" or the "why" or "what for" is the undefined >> "good" or "Quality". >> >> Remember, first there is Quality, then the division, Dynamic (a common word >> meaning "power" or "force") >> therefore once one makes a divison, a distinction in experience one is now >> entering into static conceptions. >> The dynamic quality talked about and discussed and reffered to by RMP >> ........the one that is ever-changing >> in flux and perceptual IS NOT the indefineable "now" of experience it >> reffers to. It is a concept that is descriptive >> even though it describes the "now" as undefinable. >> >> There is the indefineable "now" and then there are the words that state the >> now is indefineable. >> >> There is DQ and then there is the word "DQ" what ties them together is >> meaning, intellectual meaning. >> >> DQ is an intellectual pattern pointing to the "now". Since it is an >> intellectual pattern pointing to the now >> it does not conflict nor contradict in meaning to also say (intellectually) >> that it is ever-changing because >> it is descriptive and agrees with the now of our experience (tie to >> pragmatism) Therefore dynamic quality >> is a primary static Pragmatic "truth" the now changes and experience >> confirms this. >> >> Remember DQ/SQ is an intellectual distinction made FROM experience, therefor >> it is a thought about experience >> and should not be mistaken or confused with the indefineable preintellctual >> "now" it refers to. >> >> IF you DO...then ....you percieve a contradiction in meaning...OFTEN >> CONTRADICTION means >> that there is a misunderstanding ..It is an important tool in critical >> thinking. Contradiction is a virtue >> only as a warning sign of misunderstanding of meaning. >> >> ... >> >> AGAIN then,....to describe static patterns as everchanging is to create a >> conflict in static meaning and blur the >> first division in the explanation of MoQ and create an immediate >> contradiction in what the terms "static" and >> "dynamic" mean within the context of Pirsigs explanation. >> >> >> HAVING SAID THAT >> >> Making the assertion that all experience (both static and dynamic >> refferences) is everchanging >> simply confirms the initial assertion of the meaning the static term dynamic >> quality and to re assert >> it AFTER this conceptual split is to invite contradiction misunderstanding >> and confusion in meaning. >> >> THIS is the criticism of your "Mission statement" or "mantra" you >> continually re-post... >> >> One can only guess WHY since you do not seem to want any feedback concerning >> it. >> >> If you could give a fuck what anyone here thinks, WHY WHY would you >> continually re-post it? >> >> WHAT are you seeking? >> >> ... >> >> >> ... >> 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
