John M to Andre: The various ways you showed, in Issue 11, how DQ escapes our linguistic and intellectual constraints gave me an idea. Here's something that came to me sort of "dynamically", and I'd like to try it out here. It may be total nonsense or total crap.
Linguistic and Logical Analysis of the Concept of DQ Andre: This does not seem to be a good start John because DQ is not a concept in the MOQ. Dynamic Quality denotes the unconceptualised part of reality. Consequently, the term Dynamic Quality is not meant to be a concept but only a referring term: ¨It’s important to keep all concepts out of Dynamic Quality. Concepts are always static. Once they get into Dynamic Quality they’ll overrun it and try to present it as some kind of concept itself (Pirsig,1997 e) Anthony’s PhD, p 35) John M: >From the totality of my experience and perceptions of my world my intellect >abstracts a concept to which I apply the word-symbol DQ. Andre: You cannot abstract DQ from your intellect John. It’s interesting that you use the expression „ it came to me sort of dynamically,” . I’d suggest that that is it. Whatever came to you dynamically (and here you are referring to DQ experience…whatever that is) is always static. John M: The concept corresponding to the word DQ is such there are no logical contradictions in, or among, any of the following statements. Andre: >From the above you can see that there are no concepts corresponding to the >word DQ. DQ is referring to an ineffable ¨unconditioned . It refers to the >undifferentiated aesthetic continuum (Northrop). William James’ flux. The >Buddhist formlessness, the Void. The way Pirsig refers to it as ‚ a vague >sense of betterness” ( referring to the Zuni)…’ a dim perception of he knows >not what” gets him off [the stove] Dynamically (LILA p118-9). The entire >evolutionary progression as consisting of ‚ spur of the moment decisions…” >(LILA, p147). The trick with all these terms is NOT to imagine anything related to what they may be referring to or what they mean. Then you have already turned that to which they refer into something static. These are only meant as pointers. Need this game be continued any further John? My logical capacities have been impaired somewhat through my accident. It literally makes my head spin and that is not a nice sensation, so I avoid it when and wherever possible. Perhaps somebody else will have a go at it. I suggest you put them through an analysis a la the tetra lemma. Whatever happens, the answer you may seek will be more static stuff. But who knows. Good luck. 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
