From: Chuck Roghair (ctr@pacificpartssales.com)
Date: Thu Oct 07 2004 - 20:13:07 BST
Is the word "Quality" truly insufficient when relating to the sunset? Isn't
the "Wow Moment" an example of dynamic quality or dynamic good and your
appreciation of the sunset every moment after that initial "Wow Moment"
simply good static quality?
Isn't "Quality" buttressed with "Intellect" just "static quality?"
Isn't "what comes before..." simply apriori? That's the "wow moment" right?
The cusp of reality? Being in the here and now? Again, that's the Dynamic
Quality.
It all just makes a big Zen Circle and I get a little dizzy.
Maybe I'm just confused.
Sorry to butt-in.
Best,
Chuck
[Scott prev:]> > Yes. The trouble is that the word 'Quality' is insufficient
unless it is
> > buttressed with a word like 'Intellect', where Peirce's semiotic
> > triads come more obviously into play. There is no value unless there
> > are particulars AND universals AND interpretants, where each one
> > exists only
> in
> > relation to the other two. If you've got relationships or forms, and
> you've
> > got value, then you've got intellect. But see below about the word
> > 'intellect'.
>
> mel:
> This is not about Peirce or his conceptions.
> It is about what comes before...
[Scott:] If you are referring to so-called immediate/pure experience, it is
about that. If I say "Wow! That sunset is beautiful", while it is true that
the beauty occurred at the "wow" moment, and I am only thinking of that
beauty in the "That sunset is beautiful" moment, that doesn't mean there was
no Peircean triad in the "wow" moment. There was. There had to be me and the
sunset, and the general system of colors, shapes, and so forth, for that
"wow" moment to occur. If any one were missing, there would be no value.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk [mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]
On Behalf Of Scott Roberts
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 9:50 AM
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Subject: Re: MD A bit of reasoning
Mel,
[Scott prev:]> > Yes. The trouble is that the word 'Quality' is
insufficient unless it is
> > buttressed with a word like 'Intellect', where Peirce's semiotic triads
> > come more obviously into play. There is no value unless there are
> > particulars AND universals AND interpretants, where each one exists only
> in
> > relation to the other two. If you've got relationships or forms, and
> you've
> > got value, then you've got intellect. But see below about the word
> > 'intellect'.
>
> mel:
> This is not about Peirce or his conceptions.
> It is about what comes before...
[Scott:] If you are referring to so-called immediate/pure experience, it is
about that. If I say "Wow! That sunset is beautiful", while it is true that
the beauty occurred at the "wow" moment, and I am only thinking of that
beauty in the "That sunset is beautiful" moment, that doesn't mean there
was no Peircean triad in the "wow" moment. There was. There had to be me
and the sunset, and the general system of colors, shapes, and so forth, for
that "wow" moment to occur. If any one were missing, there would be no
value.
> mel:
> Thoughts are not dead, but they have passed into a
> position of the intellectual present, after the experiential.
> Relationships, forms, universals, particulars, and any
> other associations then come into play.
While I maintain that experience is always a matter of relationships,
forms, universals, and particulars. See the sunset example above.
>
> However, he goes on, the source of our
> > dead thoughts is not something pre-intellectual, but is living, or pure
> > thinking.
>
> mel:
> This may be becoming a problem of terminology/translation
> and usage... I would substitute a statement in this case that
> thoughts are intellectual, but the source of thought comes from
> two souces 1) other thought and 2)experience. Both are living,
> but experience is from living awareness...
[Scott:] ...which presupposes Peircean triads.
- Scott
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Oct 07 2004 - 21:02:35 BST