Re: [MD] One Day We'll Wake Up
Hi Dan, That's a fine example of what I meant when I said in another thread You're better than this, Dan Keep it coming. Ian On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Dan Glover daneglo...@gmail.com wrote: One day we'll wake up and there won't be anymore time to do the things we dreamed of doing. We'll rationalize how the world is too big and we're way too small to effect any change in it whatsoever. We'll believe in the immutability of it all, that no matter how we try we cannot change that which is apart and separate from us. As we slip backwards down that tunnel of death and as the darkness engulfs our senses we might hear the muffled laughter of the gods echoing through eternity. If we are lucky we might have a split second to wonder: why is it they laugh? Perhaps they laugh because we believe in what we are taught, never pausing so much as a second to question the validity of a world chuck full of objects awaiting our discovery of them, of never testing the limits of the laws governing a universe that is said to have existed long before we became aware of it and which will continue to exist long after we part ways, of believing so completely in the infallibility of human knowledge that we never took a moment to challenge the orthodoxy that declares we as observers of creation can never be part of that creation and bend it to our own will. Most of us will die never realizing the grandeur of the human condition. Instead we will on our deathbed bemoan our fate as if all this is preordained, as if we have no choice but to follow the dictates laid out for us by our well-meaning family and friends who by their love and in their fear keep us in place, hold us imprisoned in the invisible walls of a cell created just for us. Should we make even a hint of a move to break out of the security that these walls offer we will be gently chastised; should we persist we may well be labeled incorrigible; there are drugs specifically made to deal with such folk that are deemed much more humane than the insane asylums of years past. We will never find a choice by following the static quality patterns set in place which are meant to guide us into leading a good and productive life even if it means we must give up on who we are and what we might become. Until we disenthrall our very being from the incessant influence of those naysayers who urge us to give up and accept our destiny we will be half-dead already. The Giant will drink our blood and nosh our bones and shit us out when it is finished with us to take another bite of those young and strong like we once were. One day we'll wake up and realize the choices we had were never between this and that. By then it may well be too late. The icy hands of death will be clawing at our throats seeking to silence any hint of revelation that may be blossoming only to fade into that final breath. But I thought I had more time, we might think, as we recall all those days we spent ensnared in the clutches of untruths and misunderstandings that only served to lead us to this inevitable point. We will have spent a lifetime telling ourselves what we cannot do and what we could have done if only we had the courage to step outside the norm. It's time to wake up now. http://www.danglover.com 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
Re: [MD] relatively static
Greetings J-A, On May 13, 2013, at 1:56 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: Dear Marsha I think you are interested to know its point. Is it your habit (pattern) to think you KNOW other people's interests? That's a rather grandiose claim. - Make your point! Here's my mundane point: --- Static patterns of value are repetitive processes (multiple events), conditionally co-dependent, impermanent, and ever-changing, that pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable pattern. Within the MoQ, these patterns are morally categorized into a four-level, evolutionary, hierarchical structure: intellectual, social, biological, and inorganic. Static quality exists in stable patterns relative to other patterns. Patterns have no independent, inherent existence. --- Marsha p.s. Consider this explanation in the same category as pure experience where 'pure' doesn't mean 'pure' but merely 'relatively pure' and there are no accusations of some horrendous, unspeakable, anti-intellectual crime against definition. 12 maj 2013 x kl. 23.46 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Answer the Y/N questions yourself; I am not interested in doing so. It's your thought experiment, so explain its point. What are you thinking? Marsha On May 12, 2013, at 3:39 PM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Dear Marsha It shouldn't hurt or be dangerous in any way to just answer my questions with YES or NO. Is the clay burned to make it firm? Y/N Does that make it better and more useful? Y/N J-A Jan-Anders, The original topic has not been replaced; it was change, not clay or teapots or 'saving time'. Before (when soft and malleable) and after a firing (when firm and stable), the clay is still in a constant state of changing. In other words, both before and after the firing, the clay or teapot is ever-changing. So once again I suggest that you might take a few minutes everyday to take an introspective look: Marsha: I have pointed out many times, it is not anti-intellectual or a contradiction to understand that patterns may maintain a static, stable identity at the same time as they and their context are undergoing constant change. Think of the Ship of Theseus, or a parade (Hume) where everyone drops out but is replaced so that the parade is maintained, or the body with its cells constantly being replaced. Things can change - flow - and yet have permanence; think of a river. 11 maj 2013 x kl. 00.43 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Any time you are ready to make the point of your thought experiment clear I will consider it. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 5:50 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Well Marsha You admit that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. Do you understand that there is a change? The physical pattern changes into another, OK? J-A 10 maj 2013 kl. 10.32 skrev MarshaV: J-A, What potter? - It's your thought experiment and I don't understand it's point, so you'd be the person who must answer the questions. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 3:30 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Marsha OK, you say that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. So why do you think the potter is burning the clay? Is it because it makes the clay firm and stable or doesn't it really matter because it is still in a state of change? Jan-Anders 10 maj 2013 x kl. 09.12 skrev MarshaV: snip... ___ 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
Re: [MD] relatively static
How about this http://www.flixxy.com/the-incredible-power-of-concentration-miyoko-shida.htm#.UZCXf3DEjcU J A 13 maj 2013 x kl. 09.14 skrev MarshaV: Greetings J-A, On May 13, 2013, at 1:56 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: Dear Marsha I think you are interested to know its point. Is it your habit (pattern) to think you KNOW other people's interests? That's a rather grandiose claim. - Make your point! Here's my mundane point: --- Static patterns of value are repetitive processes (multiple events), conditionally co-dependent, impermanent, and ever-changing, that pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable pattern. Within the MoQ, these patterns are morally categorized into a four-level, evolutionary, hierarchical structure: intellectual, social, biological, and inorganic. Static quality exists in stable patterns relative to other patterns. Patterns have no independent, inherent existence. --- Marsha p.s. Consider this explanation in the same category as pure experience where 'pure' doesn't mean 'pure' but merely 'relatively pure' and there are no accusations of some horrendous, unspeakable, anti-intellectual crime against definition. 12 maj 2013 x kl. 23.46 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Answer the Y/N questions yourself; I am not interested in doing so. It's your thought experiment, so explain its point. What are you thinking? Marsha On May 12, 2013, at 3:39 PM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Dear Marsha It shouldn't hurt or be dangerous in any way to just answer my questions with YES or NO. Is the clay burned to make it firm? Y/N Does that make it better and more useful? Y/N J-A Jan-Anders, The original topic has not been replaced; it was change, not clay or teapots or 'saving time'. Before (when soft and malleable) and after a firing (when firm and stable), the clay is still in a constant state of changing. In other words, both before and after the firing, the clay or teapot is ever-changing. So once again I suggest that you might take a few minutes everyday to take an introspective look: Marsha: I have pointed out many times, it is not anti-intellectual or a contradiction to understand that patterns may maintain a static, stable identity at the same time as they and their context are undergoing constant change. Think of the Ship of Theseus, or a parade (Hume) where everyone drops out but is replaced so that the parade is maintained, or the body with its cells constantly being replaced. Things can change - flow - and yet have permanence; think of a river. 11 maj 2013 x kl. 00.43 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Any time you are ready to make the point of your thought experiment clear I will consider it. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 5:50 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Well Marsha You admit that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. Do you understand that there is a change? The physical pattern changes into another, OK? J-A 10 maj 2013 kl. 10.32 skrev MarshaV: J-A, What potter? - It's your thought experiment and I don't understand it's point, so you'd be the person who must answer the questions. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 3:30 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Marsha OK, you say that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. So why do you think the potter is burning the clay? Is it because it makes the clay firm and stable or doesn't it really matter because it is still in a state of change? Jan-Anders 10 maj 2013 x kl. 09.12 skrev MarshaV: snip... ___ 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
Re: [MD] relatively static
J-A, Would you now like to lecture me on how you have achieved a similar performance of beauty, harmony, balance, and how I could too if only I listen to your wise words? Marsha On May 13, 2013, at 3:43 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: How about this http://www.flixxy.com/the-incredible-power-of-concentration-miyoko-shida.htm#.UZCXf3DEjcU J A Greetings J-A, On May 13, 2013, at 1:56 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: Dear Marsha I think you are interested to know its point. Is it your habit (pattern) to think you KNOW other people's interests? That's a rather grandiose claim. - Make your point! Here's my mundane point: --- Static patterns of value are repetitive processes (multiple events), conditionally co-dependent, impermanent, and ever-changing, that pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable pattern. Within the MoQ, these patterns are morally categorized into a four-level, evolutionary, hierarchical structure: intellectual, social, biological, and inorganic. Static quality exists in stable patterns relative to other patterns. Patterns have no independent, inherent existence. --- Marsha p.s. Consider this explanation in the same category as pure experience where 'pure' doesn't mean 'pure' but merely 'relatively pure' and there are no accusations of some horrendous, unspeakable, anti-intellectual crime against definition. 12 maj 2013 x kl. 23.46 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Answer the Y/N questions yourself; I am not interested in doing so. It's your thought experiment, so explain its point. What are you thinking? Marsha On May 12, 2013, at 3:39 PM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Dear Marsha It shouldn't hurt or be dangerous in any way to just answer my questions with YES or NO. Is the clay burned to make it firm? Y/N Does that make it better and more useful? Y/N J-A Jan-Anders, The original topic has not been replaced; it was change, not clay or teapots or 'saving time'. Before (when soft and malleable) and after a firing (when firm and stable), the clay is still in a constant state of changing. In other words, both before and after the firing, the clay or teapot is ever-changing. So once again I suggest that you might take a few minutes everyday to take an introspective look: Marsha: I have pointed out many times, it is not anti-intellectual or a contradiction to understand that patterns may maintain a static, stable identity at the same time as they and their context are undergoing constant change. Think of the Ship of Theseus, or a parade (Hume) where everyone drops out but is replaced so that the parade is maintained, or the body with its cells constantly being replaced. Things can change - flow - and yet have permanence; think of a river. 11 maj 2013 x kl. 00.43 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Any time you are ready to make the point of your thought experiment clear I will consider it. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 5:50 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Well Marsha You admit that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. Do you understand that there is a change? The physical pattern changes into another, OK? J-A 10 maj 2013 kl. 10.32 skrev MarshaV: J-A, What potter? - It's your thought experiment and I don't understand it's point, so you'd be the person who must answer the questions. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 3:30 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Marsha OK, you say that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. So why do you think the potter is burning the clay? Is it because it makes the clay firm and stable or doesn't it really matter because it is still in a state of change? Jan-Anders 10 maj 2013 x kl. 09.12 skrev MarshaV: snip... ___ 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
Re: [MD] relatively static
So did you like the pattern she created? J A 13 maj 2013 x kl. 10.28 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Would you now like to lecture me on how you have achieved a similar performance of beauty, harmony, balance, and how I could too if only I listen to your wise words? Marsha On May 13, 2013, at 3:43 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: How about this http://www.flixxy.com/the-incredible-power-of-concentration-miyoko-shida.htm#.UZCXf3DEjcU J A Greetings J-A, On May 13, 2013, at 1:56 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: Dear Marsha I think you are interested to know its point. Is it your habit (pattern) to think you KNOW other people's interests? That's a rather grandiose claim. - Make your point! Here's my mundane point: --- Static patterns of value are repetitive processes (multiple events), conditionally co-dependent, impermanent, and ever-changing, that pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable pattern. Within the MoQ, these patterns are morally categorized into a four-level, evolutionary, hierarchical structure: intellectual, social, biological, and inorganic. Static quality exists in stable patterns relative to other patterns. Patterns have no independent, inherent existence. --- Marsha p.s. Consider this explanation in the same category as pure experience where 'pure' doesn't mean 'pure' but merely 'relatively pure' and there are no accusations of some horrendous, unspeakable, anti-intellectual crime against definition. 12 maj 2013 x kl. 23.46 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Answer the Y/N questions yourself; I am not interested in doing so. It's your thought experiment, so explain its point. What are you thinking? Marsha On May 12, 2013, at 3:39 PM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Dear Marsha It shouldn't hurt or be dangerous in any way to just answer my questions with YES or NO. Is the clay burned to make it firm? Y/N Does that make it better and more useful? Y/N J-A Jan-Anders, The original topic has not been replaced; it was change, not clay or teapots or 'saving time'. Before (when soft and malleable) and after a firing (when firm and stable), the clay is still in a constant state of changing. In other words, both before and after the firing, the clay or teapot is ever-changing. So once again I suggest that you might take a few minutes everyday to take an introspective look: Marsha: I have pointed out many times, it is not anti-intellectual or a contradiction to understand that patterns may maintain a static, stable identity at the same time as they and their context are undergoing constant change. Think of the Ship of Theseus, or a parade (Hume) where everyone drops out but is replaced so that the parade is maintained, or the body with its cells constantly being replaced. Things can change - flow - and yet have permanence; think of a river. 11 maj 2013 x kl. 00.43 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Any time you are ready to make the point of your thought experiment clear I will consider it. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 5:50 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Well Marsha You admit that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. Do you understand that there is a change? The physical pattern changes into another, OK? J-A 10 maj 2013 kl. 10.32 skrev MarshaV: J-A, What potter? - It's your thought experiment and I don't understand it's point, so you'd be the person who must answer the questions. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 3:30 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Marsha OK, you say that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. So why do you think the potter is burning the clay? Is it because it makes the clay firm and stable or doesn't it really matter because it is still in a state of change? Jan-Anders 10 maj 2013 x kl. 09.12 skrev MarshaV: snip... ___ 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.
Re: [MD] relatively static
J-A, What she? Marsha On May 13, 2013, at 4:50 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: So did you like the pattern she created? J A 13 maj 2013 x kl. 10.28 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Would you now like to lecture me on how you have achieved a similar performance of beauty, harmony, balance, and how I could too if only I listen to your wise words? Marsha On May 13, 2013, at 3:43 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: How about this http://www.flixxy.com/the-incredible-power-of-concentration-miyoko-shida.htm#.UZCXf3DEjcU J A Greetings J-A, On May 13, 2013, at 1:56 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: Dear Marsha I think you are interested to know its point. Is it your habit (pattern) to think you KNOW other people's interests? That's a rather grandiose claim. - Make your point! Here's my mundane point: --- Static patterns of value are repetitive processes (multiple events), conditionally co-dependent, impermanent, and ever-changing, that pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable pattern. Within the MoQ, these patterns are morally categorized into a four-level, evolutionary, hierarchical structure: intellectual, social, biological, and inorganic. Static quality exists in stable patterns relative to other patterns. Patterns have no independent, inherent existence. --- Marsha p.s. Consider this explanation in the same category as pure experience where 'pure' doesn't mean 'pure' but merely 'relatively pure' and there are no accusations of some horrendous, unspeakable, anti-intellectual crime against definition. 12 maj 2013 x kl. 23.46 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Answer the Y/N questions yourself; I am not interested in doing so. It's your thought experiment, so explain its point. What are you thinking? Marsha On May 12, 2013, at 3:39 PM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Dear Marsha It shouldn't hurt or be dangerous in any way to just answer my questions with YES or NO. Is the clay burned to make it firm? Y/N Does that make it better and more useful? Y/N J-A Jan-Anders, The original topic has not been replaced; it was change, not clay or teapots or 'saving time'. Before (when soft and malleable) and after a firing (when firm and stable), the clay is still in a constant state of changing. In other words, both before and after the firing, the clay or teapot is ever-changing. So once again I suggest that you might take a few minutes everyday to take an introspective look: Marsha: I have pointed out many times, it is not anti-intellectual or a contradiction to understand that patterns may maintain a static, stable identity at the same time as they and their context are undergoing constant change. Think of the Ship of Theseus, or a parade (Hume) where everyone drops out but is replaced so that the parade is maintained, or the body with its cells constantly being replaced. Things can change - flow - and yet have permanence; think of a river. 11 maj 2013 x kl. 00.43 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Any time you are ready to make the point of your thought experiment clear I will consider it. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 5:50 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Well Marsha You admit that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. Do you understand that there is a change? The physical pattern changes into another, OK? J-A 10 maj 2013 kl. 10.32 skrev MarshaV: J-A, What potter? - It's your thought experiment and I don't understand it's point, so you'd be the person who must answer the questions. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 3:30 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Marsha OK, you say that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. So why do you think the potter is burning the clay? Is it because it makes the clay firm and stable or doesn't it really matter because it is still in a state of change? Jan-Anders 10 maj 2013 x kl. 09.12 skrev MarshaV: snip... ___ 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/
Re: [MD] relatively static
Dear Marsha What do you like the writings of Robert M Pirsig? J A 13 maj 2013 x kl. 11.05 skrev MarshaV: J-A, What she? Marsha On May 13, 2013, at 4:50 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: So did you like the pattern she created? J A 13 maj 2013 x kl. 10.28 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Would you now like to lecture me on how you have achieved a similar performance of beauty, harmony, balance, and how I could too if only I listen to your wise words? Marsha On May 13, 2013, at 3:43 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: How about this http://www.flixxy.com/the-incredible-power-of-concentration-miyoko-shida.htm#.UZCXf3DEjcU J A Greetings J-A, On May 13, 2013, at 1:56 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: Dear Marsha I think you are interested to know its point. Is it your habit (pattern) to think you KNOW other people's interests? That's a rather grandiose claim. - Make your point! Here's my mundane point: --- Static patterns of value are repetitive processes (multiple events), conditionally co-dependent, impermanent, and ever-changing, that pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable pattern. Within the MoQ, these patterns are morally categorized into a four-level, evolutionary, hierarchical structure: intellectual, social, biological, and inorganic. Static quality exists in stable patterns relative to other patterns. Patterns have no independent, inherent existence. --- Marsha p.s. Consider this explanation in the same category as pure experience where 'pure' doesn't mean 'pure' but merely 'relatively pure' and there are no accusations of some horrendous, unspeakable, anti-intellectual crime against definition. 12 maj 2013 x kl. 23.46 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Answer the Y/N questions yourself; I am not interested in doing so. It's your thought experiment, so explain its point. What are you thinking? Marsha On May 12, 2013, at 3:39 PM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Dear Marsha It shouldn't hurt or be dangerous in any way to just answer my questions with YES or NO. Is the clay burned to make it firm? Y/N Does that make it better and more useful? Y/N J-A Jan-Anders, The original topic has not been replaced; it was change, not clay or teapots or 'saving time'. Before (when soft and malleable) and after a firing (when firm and stable), the clay is still in a constant state of changing. In other words, both before and after the firing, the clay or teapot is ever-changing. So once again I suggest that you might take a few minutes everyday to take an introspective look: Marsha: I have pointed out many times, it is not anti-intellectual or a contradiction to understand that patterns may maintain a static, stable identity at the same time as they and their context are undergoing constant change. Think of the Ship of Theseus, or a parade (Hume) where everyone drops out but is replaced so that the parade is maintained, or the body with its cells constantly being replaced. Things can change - flow - and yet have permanence; think of a river. 11 maj 2013 x kl. 00.43 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Any time you are ready to make the point of your thought experiment clear I will consider it. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 5:50 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Well Marsha You admit that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. Do you understand that there is a change? The physical pattern changes into another, OK? J-A 10 maj 2013 kl. 10.32 skrev MarshaV: J-A, What potter? - It's your thought experiment and I don't understand it's point, so you'd be the person who must answer the questions. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 3:30 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Marsha OK, you say that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. So why do you think the potter is burning the clay? Is it because it makes the clay firm and stable or doesn't it really matter because it is still in a state of change? Jan-Anders 10 maj 2013 x kl. 09.12 skrev MarshaV: snip... ___ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
Re: [MD] Misunderstandings are driven by what we value not by the logic we use.
djh replied: Sorry dmb, it seems you're misunderstanding me. I don't think that it is always wrong to have any kind of intellectual conversation'. [...] I do think it's important to recognise that before you commence a philosophical discussion that you recognise that it is degenerate in its own way as Pirsig does at the start of Lila.. [...] ...it is important to remember that sq is unavoidable and yet destroys DQ no matter what you want to try. dmb said: Dude, please look at your flip-flopping self. You can't deny the view and then assert it a few moments later. It's NOT always wrong AND it's important to recognize the degeneracy of philosophical discussion before you even start?! You're talking out of both sides, David. djh responds: Or talking *from* both sides. Indeed I am. From a mystic perspective the MOQ is indeed degenerate. But from an intellectual perspective the MOQ is very valuable - unavoidable even.. We cannot avoid defining things dmb - so we might as well get these definitions as good as we can.. This 'both sides' point of view is expounded in the Pirsig quotes I've provided already and even the very last sentence of Lila: Good as a noun rather than an adjective is all the Metaphysics of Quality is about. *Of course, the ultimate Quality isn't a noun or an adjective or anything else definable*, but if you had to reduce the whole Metaphysics of Quality to a single sentence, that would be it. dmb continued: And what about the most important distinction I made? You didn't even mention it! Again - please hear this idea: It is degenerate to define the ineffable mystic reality (DQ) because that a case of trying to squeeze reality itself into static intellectual patterns. But this problem, this violation, does NOT apply to philosophical terms. They are just static intellectual patterns, not the mystic reality. They ARE supposed to be definable and, except for DQ of course, it is NOT degenerate to define Pirsig's philosophic terms.. Metaphysics isn't easy to define but it has gone out of style because it is supposed to deal with the fundamental nature of being and the world. Pirsig's metaphysics avoids any definition of exactly that: the fundamental nature of the world is, for a mystic, outside of language, outside of concepts and is known directly, prior to words and concepts. djh responds: That's all fine except for the fact that, as you allude to, Dynamic Quality is a static quality definition of Dynamic Quality. So unfortunately even Pirsig fails to avoid definition of exactly that. But this is its intellectual strength - a good thing about the MOQ is that it firstly 'defines' Dynamic Quality in order to put it aside and then continue on into the static quality patterns. In other words - the MOQ recognises that it is being degenerate by defining DQ and so it has this understanding built into the very first division so that it doesn't have to worry so much about being degenerate and it can get stuck into the nitty gritty of static quality.. So really - even the term 'Dynamic Quality' is a partial definition of that which cannot be named and so in its own way - is degenerate.. Mystically so. dmb continued more: But I am just talking about concepts. I'm just talking about the meaning of the words in Pirsig's books. Don't you see the difference? Marsha doesn't… And just think about it for a minute. How does it make sense to say that it's degenerate to define words and concepts? That's just asinine. It's ridiculous, especially in this context. The truth is, I think, that a place like this COULD be where real living philosophy happens. Imagine a group of people seriously engaged in thinking together. I've seen this happen in book discussion groups but only when people are fairly serious about the material. Anti-intellectualism is certainly poisonous to any such hopes for this place. djh responds: I find it fascinating that you think it's 'asinine' to say that it's 'degenerate to define words and concepts' when Pirsig has actually gone one further and said that it's degenerate to not only be born but to have a thought of that person being born… The only person who doesn't pollute the mystic reality of the world with fixed metaphysical meanings is a person who hasn't yet been born — and to whose birth no thought has been given. The rest of us have to settle for being something less pure. Getting drunk and picking up bar-ladies and writing metaphysics is a part of life. - Lila No matter what you say or do or think - whether you like it or not - you are making fixed metaphysical statements about what both is and is not good. So this all goes back to my description of Marsha's values and the mistake that she makes. The mistake that Marsha makes isn't her claim that it's degenerate to define things (it is) - but that she can somehow avoid this degeneracy by blurring the distinction
Re: [MD] relatively static
J-A, There never was a point, was there? And now another pointless question? Mu! Marsha On May 13, 2013, at 6:10 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Dear Marsha What do you like the writings of Robert M Pirsig? J A 13 maj 2013 x kl. 11.05 skrev MarshaV: J-A, What she? Marsha On May 13, 2013, at 4:50 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: So did you like the pattern she created? J A 13 maj 2013 x kl. 10.28 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Would you now like to lecture me on how you have achieved a similar performance of beauty, harmony, balance, and how I could too if only I listen to your wise words? Marsha On May 13, 2013, at 3:43 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: How about this http://www.flixxy.com/the-incredible-power-of-concentration-miyoko-shida.htm#.UZCXf3DEjcU J A Greetings J-A, On May 13, 2013, at 1:56 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: Dear Marsha I think you are interested to know its point. Is it your habit (pattern) to think you KNOW other people's interests? That's a rather grandiose claim. - Make your point! Here's my mundane point: --- Static patterns of value are repetitive processes (multiple events), conditionally co-dependent, impermanent, and ever-changing, that pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable pattern. Within the MoQ, these patterns are morally categorized into a four-level, evolutionary, hierarchical structure: intellectual, social, biological, and inorganic. Static quality exists in stable patterns relative to other patterns. Patterns have no independent, inherent existence. --- Marsha p.s. Consider this explanation in the same category as pure experience where 'pure' doesn't mean 'pure' but merely 'relatively pure' and there are no accusations of some horrendous, unspeakable, anti-intellectual crime against definition. 12 maj 2013 x kl. 23.46 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Answer the Y/N questions yourself; I am not interested in doing so. It's your thought experiment, so explain its point. What are you thinking? Marsha On May 12, 2013, at 3:39 PM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Dear Marsha It shouldn't hurt or be dangerous in any way to just answer my questions with YES or NO. Is the clay burned to make it firm? Y/N Does that make it better and more useful? Y/N J-A Jan-Anders, The original topic has not been replaced; it was change, not clay or teapots or 'saving time'. Before (when soft and malleable) and after a firing (when firm and stable), the clay is still in a constant state of changing. In other words, both before and after the firing, the clay or teapot is ever-changing. So once again I suggest that you might take a few minutes everyday to take an introspective look: Marsha: I have pointed out many times, it is not anti-intellectual or a contradiction to understand that patterns may maintain a static, stable identity at the same time as they and their context are undergoing constant change. Think of the Ship of Theseus, or a parade (Hume) where everyone drops out but is replaced so that the parade is maintained, or the body with its cells constantly being replaced. Things can change - flow - and yet have permanence; think of a river. 11 maj 2013 x kl. 00.43 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Any time you are ready to make the point of your thought experiment clear I will consider it. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 5:50 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Well Marsha You admit that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. Do you understand that there is a change? The physical pattern changes into another, OK? J-A 10 maj 2013 kl. 10.32 skrev MarshaV: J-A, What potter? - It's your thought experiment and I don't understand it's point, so you'd be the person who must answer the questions. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 3:30 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Marsha OK, you say that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. So why do you think the potter is burning the clay? Is it because it makes the clay firm and stable or doesn't it really matter because it is still in a
Re: [MD] relatively static
bc45852...@telia.com 34acaa2f-f372-4c02-906c-e083fabc5...@att.net To: moq_disc...@moqtalk.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Dear Marsha Of course there is a point. Are you able to agree in any point? Y/N J A 13 maj 2013 x kl. 12.25 skrev MarshaV: J-A, There never was a point, was there? And now another pointless question? Mu! Marsha On May 13, 2013, at 6:10 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Dear Marsha What do you like the writings of Robert M Pirsig? J A 13 maj 2013 x kl. 11.05 skrev MarshaV: J-A, What she? Marsha On May 13, 2013, at 4:50 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: So did you like the pattern she created? J A 13 maj 2013 x kl. 10.28 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Would you now like to lecture me on how you have achieved a similar performance of beauty, harmony, balance, and how I could too if only I listen to your wise words? Marsha On May 13, 2013, at 3:43 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: How about this http://www.flixxy.com/the-incredible-power-of-concentration-miyoko-shida.htm#.UZCXf3DEjcU J A Greetings J-A, On May 13, 2013, at 1:56 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: Dear Marsha I think you are interested to know its point. Is it your habit (pattern) to think you KNOW other people's interests? That's a rather grandiose claim. - Make your point! Here's my mundane point: --- Static patterns of value are repetitive processes (multiple events), conditionally co-dependent, impermanent, and ever-changing, that pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable pattern. Within the MoQ, these patterns are morally categorized into a four-level, evolutionary, hierarchical structure: intellectual, social, biological, and inorganic. Static quality exists in stable patterns relative to other patterns. Patterns have no independent, inherent existence. --- Marsha p.s. Consider this explanation in the same category as pure experience where 'pure' doesn't mean 'pure' but merely 'relatively pure' and there are no accusations of some horrendous, unspeakable, anti-intellectual crime against definition. 12 maj 2013 x kl. 23.46 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Answer the Y/N questions yourself; I am not interested in doing so. It's your thought experiment, so explain its point. What are you thinking? Marsha On May 12, 2013, at 3:39 PM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Dear Marsha It shouldn't hurt or be dangerous in any way to just answer my questions with YES or NO. Is the clay burned to make it firm? Y/N Does that make it better and more useful? Y/N J-A Jan-Anders, The original topic has not been replaced; it was change, not clay or teapots or 'saving time'. Before (when soft and malleable) and after a firing (when firm and stable), the clay is still in a constant state of changing. In other words, both before and after the firing, the clay or teapot is ever-changing. So once again I suggest that you might take a few minutes everyday to take an introspective look: Marsha: I have pointed out many times, it is not anti-intellectual or a contradiction to understand that patterns may maintain a static, stable identity at the same time as they and their context are undergoing constant change. Think of the Ship of Theseus, or a parade (Hume) where everyone drops out but is replaced so that the parade is maintained, or the body with its cells constantly being replaced. Things can change - flow - and yet have permanence; think of a river. 11 maj 2013 x kl. 00.43 skrev MarshaV: J-A, Any time you are ready to make the point of your thought experiment clear I will consider it. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 5:50 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Well Marsha You admit that the clay changes from soft and malleable to firm and stable AND still in a constant state of changeing. Do you understand that there is a change? The physical pattern changes into another, OK? J-A 10 maj 2013 kl. 10.32 skrev MarshaV: J-A, What potter? - It's your thought experiment and I don't understand it's point, so you'd be the person who must answer the questions. Marsha On May 10, 2013, at 3:30 AM, Jan Anders Andersson janander...@telia.com wrote: Marsha OK, you say that the clay
Re: [MD] Misunderstandings are driven by what we value not by the logic we use.
dmb said: But seriously, David. I thought your overall point was dead and buried long ago. Sorry, I just think you're making no sense and quite vaguely too. Maybe you'd like to demonstrate this method of considering values. Show us how one looks at Marsha's values apart from the considerations of intellectual coherence. Use Marsha's favorite salad of words for an example, please. You know, the one she repeats so often and in which she describes static patterns as ever-changing. For the sake of argument, I'll pretend that the intellectual values (or lack thereof) don't merit consideration while you do what you're telling me to do. Show me what it is. I honestly can't imagine how that would actually work. djh responds: ...As I keep explaining - I think that it is Marsha's extreme love of *DQ* which is destroying her ability to appreciate the 'staticness' of intellectual values. dmb says: Sigh. Yea, Marsha uses her love of DQ to shit on intellectual values. Obviously. And stating the obvious helps how, exactly? Seriously, David, you cannot possibly believe that this is news to anyone. I think this shows that your suggestion is quite worthless. Would you like to show me something that isn't already in plain sight? Or would you prefer to continue with the vague and useless platitudes? Concepts and reality, David. They are two different things. This is the point you're not getting and you've now painted yourself into the same paralyzing, anti-intellectual corner. Fair warning; people get stuck in this corner for years. 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
Re: [MD] Misunderstandings are driven by what we value not by the logic we use.
Hi David B and All, In SOM Quality is qn adjective. It has existence only in the other. Evolution (levels in existence?) is the metaphysical arbiter of reality not Quality. IMHO! Joe On 5/12/13 8:37 AM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com wrote: Quality is indivisible, undefinable and unknowable in the sense that there is a knower and a known, but a metaphysics can be none of these things. A metaphysics must be divisible, definable and knowable, or there isn't any metaphysics. 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
