Hi DMB,
How does understanding embrace the indefinable? You can only get so close
to the indefinable. Can you measure the indefinable? It feels right
(good,wonderful etc.) is a legitimate argument.
Joe
On 11/23/12 11:56 AM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com wrote:
Is Pirsig correct?
Hi,
I am confused! Two is not one!
Joe
On 11/21/12 11:19 AM, 118 ununocti...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi dmb, Marsha
I would propose that there is only one Truth. The pragmatists have relegated
truths to usefulness which convert the basic meaning of truth to something
else. I have presented
Hi Andre and All,
SOM has been around for many years. Over that course flaws have been
observed. Pirsig suggested DQ/SQ, a revision of metaphysics.
Andre you have a superiority Please go away that suggests that you have a
handle on a metaphysical description of reality that will knock my socks
Ki Marsha and All,
IMHO DQ.
Joe
On 11/19/12 11:55 PM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
to put it another way
I would give all metaphors
in return for one word
drawn
out of my breast like a rib
for one word
contained within the boundaries
of my
skin
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo,
Hi Andre and All,
I echo peace. Pity so few... get the finger!
Joe
On 11/18/12 1:05 PM, Andre Broersen andrebroer...@gmail.com wrote:
I hereby devote my deep respect for R.M. Pirsig. He is way ahead of his
time. Pity so few of us understand the finger he is raising...for too
many do not
Hi DMB and All,
DQ/RE/MI/FA/SOL/LA/TI/DO. Which one is truth?
Joe
On 11/17/12 8:57 AM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com wrote:
But Marsha is right about one thing; she's not at all interested in truth. It
doesn't matter if it's fancy or plain and simple. She just won't hear it no
Hi MarshaV and All;
This quote is interesting. Can what we think, SQ, follow from the
experience of DQ conceived as unrest in our minds? What is the trigger for
knowing the indefinable? I suggest the experience of emotions. Logic is
not in the forefront of an emotional response, but then
Hi Andre and All,
One which is two? At the emotional level DQ is indefinable. In the
logic of DQ/SQ metaphysics 1 and 2 are not available concepts emotionally.
Individuality is indefinable!
At the intellectual level 1 is not 2 according to mathematical logic. 1
being 2 is illogical.
Joe
Hi Mark and All,
IMHO Metaphysics does not describe balanced reality. Quality opens the
logical doors for evolution as levels in existence. In evolution stasis is
not logical good/bad!
Joe
On 11/5/12 10:46 PM, 118 ununocti...@gmail.com wrote:
DQ and SQ must become balanced. The objective
Hi David and All,
At the intellectual level metaphysics nurtures logic. At the emotional
level value follows mysticism. In terms of certainty the intellectual level
of evolution embraces logic SQ. At the emotional level indefinable DQ
reality manifests.
I embrace logic SQ as a higher level
Hi Marsha and All,
I experience emotions but I cannot define them. I like the word belief to
stand between DQ and SQ. I am certainly aware of something when discussing
the indefinable.
Joe
On 10/27/12 11:14 PM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
I have the MoQ as Reality =
Hi Marsha and All,
IMHO to believe is emotional DQ experience. To know my belief is
intellectual DQ/SQ.
Joe
On 10/27/12 3:22 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Mark,
To believe is to know you believe, and to know you believe is not to
believe.
(Sartre, Jean-Paul)
Not this,
Hi Mark and All,
IMHO the perception of value is relative, evolution. Metaphysics is DQ/SQ
not relativity. There has to be the primary perception of DQ/SQ to have
existential merit in the creation of duality in an indefinable/definable
format of metaphysics.
Awareness is a strange word.
for the
real world.
Mark
On Oct 23, 2012, at 1:42 PM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi Mark and All,
Logic and Evolution! If MOQ utilizes the tools of SOM it is SOM logic.
Pirsig envisions a different logic embracing an indefinable DQ with
definable SQ reality. In SOM S
.)
Horse
On 23/10/2012 21:42, Joseph Maurer wrote:
Hi Mark and All,
Logic and Evolution! If MOQ utilizes the tools of SOM it is SOM logic.
Pirsig envisions a different logic embracing an indefinable DQ with
definable SQ reality. In SOM S is definable and O is definable. MOQ uses
away with the battlefield
of the objective and relative world. It provides a world of ever becoming.
I appreciate your contributions.
Cheers,
Mark
On Oct 22, 2012, at 4:37 PM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi Mark and All,
DQ indefinable. SQ definable. Strange
Hi Mark and All,
DQ indefinable. SQ definable. Strange bedfellows in reality.
Indefinable/Definable equals 1? IMHO MOQ Metaphysics is not SOM
mathematics S/O.
Joe
On 10/21/12 1:31 PM, 118 ununocti...@gmail.com wrote:
If we use DQ and SQ as variables, a system of homeostasis would
be
Hi DMB and All,
The difficult moment is the indefinable moment in the perception of DQ.
Indefinable emotions, evolve to logical SQ intellectual definitions. IMHO
Pirsig saw that logic follows definition. Definition is the intellectual
level.
The emotional level DQ is experienced by all. It
Hi DMB,
I want to put these quotes in the dialectic of DQ/SQ.
the ³virtuous hero must henceforth be a dialectician²
There is a logic for evolution DQ/SQ in that sentence. The indefinable
emotions support the definable intellect. There is so much juice in the
Aha! experience that I want to use
Hi David and All,
IMHO Metaphysics follows the acceptance of the reality of logic. Pirsig
adds to logic the statement that DQ is indefinable and logical in a
description of metaphysical reality, evolution.
DQ is enabled in logic and indefinable. The metaphysics of DQ/SQ has a
structure of
Hi Marsha
The reality for truth following DQ/SQ. Thank You!
Joe
On 10/7/12 1:52 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
For no one can think what is not, or think anything different from that which
he feels; and this is always true² (167b)
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
Hi Marsha and All,
Pirsig observed metaphysics DQ/SQ. He then tried to say it and discovered
that the indefinable cannot be said only experienced. He broadened
communication from the experience of words to include indefinable
experience, no words possible. MOQ differs metaphysically from SOM.
Hi Mark and All,
Quality never changes! Definable/indefinable seems like a description of
change. At the least it focuses my attention on words and meaning in
communication.
Joe
On 10/5/12 10:55 PM, 118 ununocti...@gmail.com wrote:
Quality has been presented in hundreds of ways over the
PM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false,
while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is
true. Metaphysics, 101 lb
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http
Hi Mark and all,
IMHO To conceive evolution there must be an experience of levels in
existence. I perceive DQ as emotional reality and SQ as intellectual
reality. Communication with another is through definition, analogy and
gesture. The other experiences a community in experiencing similar
wouldn't say that letters are the post office, would we?
Cheers,
Mark
On Oct 2, 2012, at 12:36 PM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi MarshaV and all,
The continuous present is indefinable. Logic must be used to create the
value of communication/definition. Logic
Hi MarshaV and all,
The continuous present is indefinable. Logic must be used to create the
value of communication/definition. Logic as the intellectual level is more
valuable than perception at the emotional level. I am not alone.
Joe
On 10/1/12 11:50 PM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
At
Hi Marsha,
I am metaphysically unsure of the Question and Answer.
Joe
On 10/2/12 12:57 PM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Greetings Joe,
Question asked; answer given.
Marsha
On Oct 2, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi MarshaV and all
Hi Mark and All,
There is no problem in experiencing the indefinable if individuality itself
is indefinable. What is one? Mathematics defines 1 and runs with
scientific logic which is static.
Pirsig suggests that individuality is both definable Sq and indefinable DQ
in an evolutionary format.
Hi David and All,
IMHO there is no way to conceptualize DQ! SQ is conceptualized in
definition. DQ is the experience of the individual. Through communication
of not this not that a logic for existence can be agreed upon by two people.
Friendship values this logical agreement.
The realization
Hi David and All,
IMHO Pirsig accepted that pragmatism unstiffens all our theories, limbers
them up and sets each to work and DQ/SQ reality is the useful metaphysical
structure.
The fly in the ointment becomes what is my experience of indefinable
reality? A logical solution to that question
Hi Mark,
(alliteration is remarkable)
In DQ/SQ metaphysics MOQ, something remains indefinable. How can I know the
indefinable? Experience! How can I communicate the indefinable? Analogy,
Metaphor nod at metaphysical terms. DQ dances to SQ.
Joe
On 9/15/12 10:10 AM, 118
(patterned) value into a
four-level, evolutionary, hierarchical structure: inorganic, biological,
social and intellectual, but I thought, in a philosophical discussion, you
often preferred do, re, mi, fa, so, la, ti.
Marsha
On Sep 12, 2012, at 3:33 PM, Joseph Maurer jh
Hi Mark and All,
In a metaphysics formulated as DQ/SQ, experience becomes an arbiter for
truth. There is always something in my experience which is indefinable, yet
knowable. Perception through logic becomes important in communication.
IMHO Hypothetical describes a rough draft. Indefinable DQ
Hi Marsha and all,
In a philosophical discussion I do not like the word hypothetical applied
to patterns in an environment where evolution has been suggested. I like
evolution as levels in existence.
Joe
On 9/12/12 9:19 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
I prefer to think of patterns as
Hi David and All,
Bare bones metaphysics! Evolution, order, conception are still on the
table. For myself I like a theory of knowledge based on the acceptance of
emotions as DQ. Emotions are indefinable like DQ.
Ladies seem to be closer to their emotions than men. IMHO the metaphysics
of
Hi David and All,
Quality is universal. Quality is Existence. Evolution comes in different
flavors. I suppose existence evolves. Do, re, mi_fa, sol la ti_Do. I
Wonder!
Joe
On 9/4/12 1:13 AM, David Harding davidjhard...@gmail.com wrote:
Quality is before you or me or anything else.
Hi DMB and All,
Reality is DQ/SQ. As far as I know there are no definable restraints on
indefinable DQ levels in existence, evolution, like mastery. Aha! is the
proper response to metaphysics. Mastery is a worthy discipline for a
mechanic. DQ/SQ vs SOM!
Joe
On 8/29/12 9:15 AM, david
/sq)
View 2.) MoQ = theory, intellectual static pattern of value
Marsha
On Aug 27, 2012, at 3:01 PM, Joseph Maurer wrote:
Hi Marsha,
Hypothesis: an unproved scientific conclusion drawn from known facts and
used as a basis for further investigation or experimentation.
DQ
Hi Marsha,
Hypothesis: an unproved scientific conclusion drawn from known facts and
used as a basis for further investigation or experimentation.
DQ is indefinable and not subject to any proof by logical investigation.
With the conception of DQ/SQ metaphysics, Pirsig redefines hypothesis.
Hi MarshaV and All,
What kind of Love?
Love is emotion, is DQ! What is DQ? The experience of an individual like
indefinable emotion. Emotion is analogical.
There probably is an answer suggested in evolution. When I describe
evolution as levels in existence metaphysics raises its hand to say
(unpatterned/patterned) -
all meaningful.
Marsha
On Aug 24, 2012, at 2:00 PM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi MarshaV, and All,
I see Love and Hate as indefinable DQ. Since they are experienced I leave
them at the indefinable emotional level. DQ/SQ is reality
, at 11:09 AM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi Mark,
O as nothing is indefinable. O as pre-intellectual is open to an emotional
emptiness, perception, enabling Pirsig to describe metaphysics as DQ/SQ.
Joe
On 8/23/12 9:40 PM, 118 ununocti...@gmail.com wrote:
However, you
, that you are treating love and hate
as abstracted intellectual patterns of value. That might be a way to separate
such emotions from experience, separated from experience in the present.
Marsha
On Aug 23, 2012, at 3:10 PM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi MarshaV and All
Hi Mark,
O as nothing is indefinable. O as pre-intellectual is open to an emotional
emptiness, perception, enabling Pirsig to describe metaphysics as DQ/SQ.
Joe
On 8/23/12 9:40 PM, 118 ununocti...@gmail.com wrote:
However, you point out a difference, in common perception, between
physics
Hi MarshaV and All:
I am curious how do you separate emotions from the experience of Quality?
Love/Hate are not separated by negation. Love. Not love! Hate. Not hate!
Joe
On 8/23/12 12:42 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Dynamic Quality is not divisible, not definable and not knowable,
Hi Mark
When the indefinable becomes definable you embrace the logic of physics.
DQ/SQ is a metaphysical statement. Metaphysics stands outside of the logic
of physics as a more far reaching discipline for describing evolution.
The Mathematics of physical discipline is logically prevented from
Hi MarhaV,
IMHO emotions stand outside of logic. Dynamic Quality is an emotional
experience. DQ is experienced and is contrary to inexperienced reality.
Joe
On 8/22/12 2:36 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Dynamic Quality is not divisible, not definable and not knowable, though it
can be
Hi MarshaV and All,
I do not know why my logic button says tilt at the phrase evolution as
hypothetical? Mathematics, the language of physics, uses a logic button:.
I is not 2. The button is not hypothetical! It is logical. The rigid
logic of mathematics cannot encompass indefinable DQ. DQ
Hi Mark and All,
Pirsig proposes a metaphysics of DQ indefinable and SQ definable.
Definition must have some meaning to separate DQ/SQ.
For myself I accept DQ as indefinable and SQ as definable. Since the
definable has a greater range than the indefinable I would expect SQ to have
a greater
Hi MarshaV and all,
Metaphysics is not Physics! Pirsig suggested DQ (indefinable) SQ
(definable) as the base of metaphysics. I experience the indefinable. I
experience the definable. DQ/SQ.
How can definable SQ be a higher level than indefinable DQ?
The concept of evolution is necessary to
Hi MarshaV,
If you are operating within an evolutionary environment it is just a mess!
Joe
On 8/16/12 3:20 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Greetings,
When you're living in a monastery it might be called religious or
soteriological. If you're operating within an academic
Hi Mark and All,
IMHO Evolution is not analogy. Evolution describes levels in existence.
Joe
On 8/14/12 11:43 AM, 118 ununocti...@gmail.com wrote:
Using cultural norms to criticize cultural norms Yes, the levels are
an analogy. They are not necessary to present Quality in metaphysical
Hi Mark and All,
I also see Quality as the mover in differentiation. I suggest that
discrete levels in existence exemplified in the 7 toned musical scale
manifest as the differentiator in the evolution of reality. Quality as a
noun rather than the first adjective embodies 7 discrete levels in
in true/false limbo in the description of reality DQ/SQ.
Joe
On 8/2/12 12:51 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Joe,
Truth?
Marsha
On Aug 1, 2012, at 1:09 PM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi Marsha,
If Dynamic Quality is unknowable how can you write about
Hi Dan and All,
The beauty in your writing leaves me in tears of wonder! Thank You!
Joe
On 7/31/12 8:18 PM, Dan Glover daneglo...@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't understand a thing. Perhaps I still don't...
Thank you,
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
Hi Marsha,
If Dynamic Quality is unknowable how can you write about it from a truth
sense?
Joe
On 8/1/12 7:21 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Dynamic Quality is indivisible, undefinable and unknowable.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
Hi Dan and All,
Pirsig proposes a metaphysical difference between DQ and SQ. DQ is
indefinable experience and SQ is definable experience. Seeing the Sun is
definable experience. But there is a time lag. Maybe the sun is exploding
while you are watching, and you will need to get into your
Hi Dan and All,
There is no accepted order of evolution. The word evolution is used outside
of metaphysical discussions.
For myself I accept that Evolution is a word that describes levels in
existence. Dq describes existence without definition. Experience as the
intellectual endeavor SQ
Hi MarshaV,
Evolution has been suggested as a word that describes the reality of a
hierarchy in levels of individuality. For myself I like to conceptualize
evolution as levels in existence.
Joe
On 7/27/12 12:26 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
All patterns from all levels have been
Hi Marsha and All,
IMHO Metaphysics answers the question of What. In SOM existence was
accepted as reality S/O. Pirsig redefined existence as DQ/SQ. Freewill DQ
is indefinable. How I experience the indefinable falls in the realm of
metaphysics.
Science accepts Quantum investigation as
Hi Ian and all,
I have no idea how you view evolution. For myself I am content to view
evolution as the hierarchy in existence. I agree that mathematically
created numbers are physical terms not metaphysical logic.
Joe
On 7/23/12 8:30 AM, Ian Glendinning ian.glendinn...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Dan and All,
IMHO It is not useful to describe Dynamic Quality as the source of all
things, completely simple and always new. DQ is a metaphysical term,
described as being indefinable experience.
The experience of emotions seems to be a proper analogy for DQ. I do not
see emotions as the
Hi Marsha;
Until Pirsig came on the scene, It was accepted that the knower and the
known were separate. I am not what I know I only act that way.
With DQ/SQ as a metaphysical description of reality the knower experiences
indefinable reality. In knowledge experience is indefinable in being
Hi Marsha,
I have not studied Buddhism. I am somewhat brainwashed. In logic it is
difficult to discriminate between the knower and the known in the search for
consciousness. It is difficult to accept indefinable reality.
The brain does its best to ignore malfunctioning hardware in the body
Hi Marsha and All,
Nothing and indefinable describe differing metaphysical reality.
Indefinable does not interdict an experience of DQ. Nothing denies the
experience of DQ.
What is the balancing act of knowing the indefinable? Experience! You
can't argue from not this/not that for a reality
Hi Marsha and All,
Force, Mass, and Energy fall within the purview of mathematics for
description. 1 is defined. Mathematical logic cannot embrace evolution.
In MOQ DQ is indefinable. The mathematical logic of physics supports
definition.
The DQ/SQ logic of metaphysics is not bound in
and
follow the clues.
Cheers,
Mark
On 7/10/12, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi Mark and All,
Is quality a lie?
On 7/9/12 9:12 PM, 118 ununocti...@gmail.com wrote:
The
words and examples can be distracting, but so long as we keep in mind
that Quality overrides truth, then we
Hi DMB and All,
MOQ DQ/SQ.
Hi David and All,
I guess the question to be asked is: Is MOQ metaphysics or reality? With a
DQ/SQ base Quality apparently does not apply to reality in existence as a
metaphysics. The central reality of mysticism, the reality that Phaedrus
had called 'Quality' in
Hi Ham and All,
Essence and Existence. Which word conveys reality? Or is there an
indefinable reality DQ, definable reality SQ as Pirsig suggests? DQ/SQ
metaphysics of Quality
Joe
On 7/9/12 1:55 PM, Ham Priday hampd...@verizon.net wrote:
If you don't like the word Essence, then by all
Hi David and All,
I guess DQ is also inconceivable along with indefinable?
Joe
On 7/9/12 12:41 PM, david buchanan dmbucha...@hotmail.com wrote:
Joe said to DMB:
I guess in my last post I didn't include all the caps, but I am curious. Am I
being guided to a particular interpretation? Or
Hi Ham and All,
I realize you like the word Essence. For me it is a meaningless word! I
do not know how a meaningless word can be an ultimate object in terms of a
subject. I thought the word creator preempted all source things.
Joe
On 7/9/12 10:01 AM, Ham Priday hampd...@verizon.net wrote:
Hi DMB,
Would you mind telling me your reaction to the words capitalized? Is there
any hidden meaning?
Joe
On 7/9/12 11:47 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
Hi Mark,
Is MOQ only self-evaluation?
Joe
On 7/9/12 11:39 AM, 118 ununocti...@gmail.com wrote:
Metaphysics is just tricks with words. Now
you see it now you don't. It is a ghost of reason.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
Any INTELLECTUALLY CONCEIVED object is always in the past and therefore
unreal. REALITY is always the MOMENT OF VISION BEFORE the
intellectualization takes place. There is no other reality. This
PRE-INTELLECTUAL REALITY is what Phædrus felt he had properly identified as
Quality.
Hi DMB,
I guess
Hi Jan and All,
At 79 skating on thin ice is not recommended. Moq is thin ice! Yet here I
am. I can't guarantee that I will read a lot. I think of emotions as a
level in evolution.
Inorganic, Organic 1, reproduction when cell splits into two cells, Organic
2, when reproduction occurs from a
Hi David and All,
In evolution I place a higher emotional level DQ only lower than a higher
intellectual level. A higher emotional level DQ only is higher than the
normal intellectual level, and lower than the higher intellectual level,
heroes!
Joe
On 7/7/12 12:43 PM, david buchanan
Hi Ham,
Metaphysics is a level for discourse beyond mathematical physics. To accept
ultimate reality metaphysically, is there an analogy to the experience of
beyond-logical Faith in an indefinable category DQ like emotions?
On 7/8/12 11:17 AM, Ham Priday hampd...@verizon.net wrote:
Ultimate
Hi DMB and All,
Concepts are static and discontinuous. Reality is dynamic and flowing!
For myself this describes SQ/DQ. There is an aspect of reality that is
indefinable DQ. And I know the indefinable! How? Emotionally!. Does that
make women who are closer to babies emotionally more in
instructions that
is important. We learn how to drive through instructions. However,
driving is much more than those instructions. They just help one get
started.
Cheers,
Mark
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi Mark and all,
You state Quality
a few things to say about insanity and its relationship to the
social level.
Cheers,
Mark
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
HI Marsha and All,
I am trying to clarify for myself the conception of metaphysics as
different
from physics. Physics uses
Hi Mark and all,
You state Quality is not for everyone who qualifies? Metaphysics formats
physics, and I would say that gravity is for everyone on a planet, physics.
Metaphysics accepts Dq/SQ replacing SOM.
IMHO Quality as a metaphysical term is everything.
Joe
On 7/4/12 5:52 PM, 118
HI Marsha and All,
I am trying to clarify for myself the conception of metaphysics as different
from physics. Physics uses mathematics as its logic for describing truth.
DQ is indefinable, outside of mathematical logic yet knowable by an
individual. Metaphysics, physics are different
Hi Marsha and All,
Can indefinable be a concept? DQ, accepted as indefinable, cannot be
outside of perception. DQ/SQ metaphysics. I've got a secret! In MOQ I
experience indefinable DQ and definable SQ.
Indefinable reality, evolution, is metaphysically real. Stretch! Is
evolution just
Hi Ant McWatt, Ham, and All,
I am interested in Pirsig's thought process leading to a proposal of a
metaphysics of knowing an indefinable DQ and Definable SQ. It can't be only
by usage since we are discussing metaphysics as definition not physics as
reality. Psychology is a branch of physics
Hi Ham and All,
Decide! I don't know that free-will can stand the heat.
Joe
On 7/1/12 11:36 AM, Ham Priday hampd...@verizon.net wrote:
Existence is the value agent's relational perspective of otherness -- the
reality in whose Oneness there is no other.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo,
Hi Andre and All,
Quite a diatribe! DQ is not SQ and SQ is not DQ. If DQ/SQ is the source of
knowledge and DQ and SQ are not definable as different then metaphysics are
not a different logical discipline from physics. Mathematics and its
inability to describe evolution (one is not one) becomes
Hi Marsha,
DQ from a long time ago.
On 6/27/12 10:51 AM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
Hi Joe,
It is a beautiful translation, isn't it? I thought the references to
darkness made it particularly poignant.
Marsha
On Jun 27, 2012, at 12:12 PM, Joseph Maurer wrote
a translation by S. Mitchell)
On Jun 26, 2012, at 2:58 PM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi Marsha and All,
Fundamental nature is a mouthful! Is it a definition for reality? I
conceptualize logic as being unable to describe evolution in terms of
SQ/DQ, defined/indefinable
Hi Marsha and All,
Fundamental nature is a mouthful! Is it a definition for reality? I
conceptualize logic as being unable to describe evolution in terms of
SQ/DQ, defined/indefinable reality.
Indefinable reality is individualized DQ and can only be described in
analogical terms. The
Hi Marsha and All,
How do we know all that exists?
Pirsig describes the experience of reality as DQ/SQ, indefinable/definable
reality.
I conceptualize a manifestation of the differences in species, as evolution,
a manifestation of levels in existence.
Indefinable DQ is individual perception.
Hi Marsha
Some things that I know yesterday (Passage of time) I question today!
DQ(instantaneous)/SQ(delay)! Singularity/duality! DQ/SQ not DQ and SQ.
There is duality in my experience. I do not create the metaphysics DQ/SQ as
differing entities. I accepy duality in the existing intellect.
Hi Marsha,
I did not realize that Pirsig is a heart surgeon. It helps!
Joe
On 6/23/12 1:01 PM, MarshaV val...@att.net wrote:
From my open heart to your open heart,
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
, at 12:46 PM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi Mark,
Why use two words DQ/SQ when one will do? The freedom to make something up
in metaphysics is judged by agreement to existence not by being a word
smith.
Joe
On 6/23/12 10:21 AM, 118 ununocti...@gmail.com wrote
Hi Marsha and All,
Words are of no help for discussing an indefinable reality, DQ. Pirsig
declares DQ a metaphysical base along with SQ for rationalizing MOQ. What
do I accept as real, without words? How about Love!
Love is DQ! Love is an emotion. By this all men will know that you are my
Hi Mark,
Why use two words DQ/SQ when one will do? The freedom to make something up
in metaphysics is judged by agreement to existence not by being a word
smith.
Joe
On 6/23/12 10:21 AM, 118 ununocti...@gmail.com wrote:
Definitions are something we make up. They are real for us
if
we
Hi Mark
Understanding without definition. Pirsig described a metaphysics DQ/SQ in
which DQ is indefinable. I accept that DQ can be experienced and remain
indefinable.
Physics differs from metaphysics in a way that SQ differs from DQ. I even
recall a phrase: Forgive them! They know not what
Hi Marsha,
Metaphysics formats knowledge. How is it possible for DQ, a metaphysical
term, to be unknowable? That would place it outside Metaphysics into a
basket of Faith. Indivisible could be a characteristic of indefinable? For
me to see reality as indivisible negates evolution, and I am
nothing to know and no one to know it.
Marsha
On Jun 19, 2012, at 2:38 PM, Joseph Maurer jh...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi MarshaV and All,
DQ is Dark Night. Seemingly nothing, since is declared to be indefinable!
DQ is not nothing! Comforting emotion makes my hair stand on end like
Hi MarshaV and All,
DQ is Dark Night. Seemingly nothing, since is declared to be indefinable!
DQ is not nothing! Comforting emotion makes my hair stand on end like a
madman. I feel so terribly alone. The wonder of wonders is that DQ can
stand alone begging SQ for boundaries. The response to
301 - 400 of 1284 matches
Mail list logo
