On Thurs 5 April 2007 11:59 PM Ham writes to Dan: <snip>
The MoQ may have been built on morality, but morality is man's invention. And I disagree that the individual creates himself. The individual is a being-aware. The sensible self is negated from the uncreated source that finite beings perceive as otherness. Living life fully is not about avoiding suffering. It's realizing the value of what we experience and understanding it as the differentiated perspective of an absolute Essence. Perhaps in MoQ parlance this would be called "living at the intellectual level". In any case, it has little in common with Buddhism. On Tues 22 May 2007 8:10 AM Arlo writes to Platt: [Arlo asked] 1. Could animals ever respond to DQ? [Platt] No. [Arlo] Also, see below where you suggest otherwise. But I'll take this answer as what are you saying for now. Okay, before humans, what did respond to DQ? If that thing no longer responds to DQ, give me an example of what it did "before" (when it did respond to DQ) that it can no longer do. [Arlo had asked] 6. Before man (and these levels) how did things respond to DQ? [Platt] Luck [Arlo] I don't understand. Was there some feature of the thing that enabled it to respond to DQ? [Platt] Apparently you believe that everything responds to DQ every moment of every day ad infinitum. [Arlo] I believe that Pirsig was correct in saying that "it's better here" is a response to DQ. [Platt] I believe based on Pirsig's explanation of evolution in Chapter 11 that I asked you to read that a single atom or animal at one time responded to the moral force of DQ to advance evolution. [Arlo] You just said above animals could never respond to DQ. Are you now saying that at one time they did? Hi Ham, Arlo, Platt and All: IMO these two post have a connection in what they do not distinguish. Is there a difference between a 'manifestation' and 'order (evolution)'? IMO the MOQ answers yes! A manifestation is sq. Evolution, the determinant of order is dq. SOM answers yes! The manifestation is cosmic evolution, objective order. Morality is conscious evolution, subjective order. Joe > [Arlo asked] > 1. Could animals ever respond to DQ? > > [Platt] > No. > > [Arlo] > Also, see below where you suggest otherwise. But I'll take this answer as > what > are you saying for now. > > Okay, before humans, what did respond to DQ? If that thing no longer > responds > to DQ, give me an example of what it did "before" (when it did respond to > DQ) > that it can no longer do. > > [Arlo had asked] > 6. Before man (and these levels) how did things respond to DQ? > > [Platt] > Luck > > [Arlo] > I don't understand. Was there some feature of the thing that enabled it to > respond to DQ? > > [Platt] > Apparently you believe that everything responds to DQ every moment of > every day > ad infinitum. > > [Arlo] > I believe that Pirsig was correct in saying that "it's better here" is a > response to DQ. > > [Platt] > I believe based on Pirsig's explanation of evolution in Chapter 11 that I > asked > you to read that a single atom or animal at one time responded to the > moral > force of DQ to advance evolution. > > [Arlo] > You just said above animals could never respond to DQ. Are you now saying > that > at one time they did? > > > > > 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
