[Joseph]
> I agree we are talking past each other. My point of
> view after reading Pirsig is that there are two ways
> of looking at things: 1. as a manifestation, sq'
> objective, cosmic evolution, or 2. as order dq'
> subjective conscious evolution. This point of view
> is also expressed in esoteric literature.
Where does Pirsig point out sq is objective and
dq is subjective? This is back to SOM right? This is
back to Bo, right? Subjects and objects are here, but
not separated and disconnected. I don't see dq as
order - order is a static pattern, an organizational
value where systems exist such as social orders and
biological systems, etc... These are the levels,
right? Dynamic quality is where the distinctions of
static patterns breakdown and are at the cutting edge
of reality where defining such patterns is difficult.
Difficult for who? I see dq as a generality in which
distinctions in general can't be categorized in strict
logic.
[Joseph]
> IMO morality comes from a point of view of order,
the
> lower and higher are related existentially through
> dq. There is no morality apart from dq.
But what of static pattern of value or static
quality? Aren't quality and value - morality
according to the MOQ?
[Joseph]
> In a manifestation you cannot describe dq as it is
> indefinable. The statement 'everything is quality'
> is from the point of view of order which is dq.
First your saying here, "...dq as it is
indefinable.", then your saying, "...'everything is
quality' is from the point of view... dq." How does
dq which is indefinable become something that is
defined as in, "everything is quality"?
[Joseph]
> IMO Objects are sq, manifestations. In the periodic
> table there is no accounting for the relatonship
> between life and water dq, an atmosphere with oxygen
> and proprietary awareness dq.
In the periodic table oxygen is a static pattern
on the inorganic level, and according to the MoQ there
are four levels that in total are called static
quality. Philosophy, MoQ philosophy, understands that
the levels are under one umbrella called static
quality. Quality as a whole also involves dq. Dq and
sq are quality. We can intellectually know this and
bridge these levels, but to intellectually bridge
these levels doesn't exclude what we know
intellectually from reality, which is reality is
quality according to the MOQ whether we
intellectualize this or not. Isn't a primary reality
not just intellectualized but also experienced upon
three other levels called inorganic, etc...?
this chat is nice, thanks.
Let's continue if you may. If anything I'll learn
your perspective and you maybe mine.
woods,
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Finding fabulous fares is fun.
Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel
bargains.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
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/
