Hi all, There are 5 topic suggestions to choose from this month. As always if there is not a clear winner - i.e. a tie - I'll select those that have tied and ask for you to re-vote.
You have just under three days to send in your vote (no extensions). There is only 1 vote per member so please don't be voting for more than 1 topic. I will not be forwarding the vote posts to the list but will post the final results around 10pm (NY time) on Wednesday, so don't get worried that your post hasn't made it. I shall show all the voters on the CALL FOR VOTES final results so if you don't see your name on it email me then. Any topic that is not used will be added to a page of potential topics which can be re-used at a later date if you so desire. Here's the list of topics on which to vote. DISCUSSION TOPICS FOR February 2004 ================================== 1) Is it THE MoQ we are discussing (i.e. as meant by Pirsig) or are we (should we be) discussing the merits of our various versions (with Pirsig's writings expressing only one version or even a version that develops in time)? --- Wim Nusselder 2) Are the patterns of one who well understands music notation aesthetically more beautiful than one who does not well understand music notation? (One may think of this question in terms of ability to improvise and ability to play notated score.) --- Mark Maxwell 3) Is the romantic/classic split from the ZMM model (classic/romantic) really separate from the MoQ? Or are these just different ways of cutting up the same pie? --- Amilcar Kabral 4) "Seen in the light of the MOQ can the value that ZAMM treats in connection with the Sophists and Ancient Greece's "Aret�" be given a position in the static hierarchy?" --- Bo Skutvik 5) "Can we detect any discrepancies between these two quotes?" Pirsig in ZMM chapter 20: "Phaedrus remembered Hegel had been regarded as a bridge between Western and Oriental philosophy. The Vedanta of the Hindus, the Way of the Taoists, even the Buddha had been described as an absolute monism similar to Hegel's philosophy. Phaedrus doubted at the time, however, whether mystical Ones and metaphysical monisms were introconvertable since mystical Ones follow no rules and metaphysical monisms do. His Quality was a metaphysical entity, not a mystic one. Or was it? What was the difference?" Pirsig in Lila chapter 30: "The MOQ associates religious mysticism with Dynamic Quality but it would certainly be a mistake to think that the MOQ endorses the static beliefs of any particular religious sect. Phaedrus thought sectarian religion was a static social fallout of DQ and that while some sects had fallen less than others, none of them told the whole truth." "He thought about how once this integration occurs and DQ is identified with religious mysticism it produces an avalanche of information as to what Dynamic Quality is. A lot of this relgious mysticism is just low-grade "yelping about God" of course, but if you search for the sources of it and don't take the yelps too literally a lot of interesting things turn up." --- David Buchanan MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_focus/ MF Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/mf/subscribe.html
