Re: MD SOLAQI as a gift of understanding

From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Sat Jan 31 2004 - 15:48:47 GMT

  • Next message: David MOREY: "Re: MD SQ-SQ tension/coherence in the drone."

    Hi

    Of course you cannot pin it down empirically
    because empiricism assumes SO divide.
    How do you think of quality in a non-conscious way?
    If quality is experienced then quality is within consciousness.
    My problem with idealism is with its closure and failure
    to make room for DQ. Consciousness, however, clearly
    is a concept that seems to hint at/imply DQ. I think that we
    use terms that overlap at various points. I like to think that
    we start with a sort of
    experiece/quality/conscious/free/value/care/Being/Be(com)ing whole
    and then move on to a SQ/DQ differentiation followed by the
    full and never ending differentiation of all SQ. I do think consciousness ic
    closely
    tied to DQ, Heidegger calls it the clearing into which Being gathers.
    Certainly we become intensely conscious in high DQ situations such as the 2
    car
    crashes I have been in. Also SQ seems to tend towards the unconscious,
    e.g. habits, rocks, etc. DQ/SQ and ontological stratification implies a
    process
    theory, DQ implies freedom, how does freedom and event tie up? In an
    indeterminate
    process why do things go one way rather than another, how close is this to
    the human
    experience of choice and its necessary relationship to consciousness?

    regards
    David M

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Paul Turner" <paulj.turner@ntlworld.com>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 10:58 AM
    Subject: RE: MD SOLAQI as a gift of understanding

    > David
    >
    > Paul:
    > In the MOQ, mind and consciousness are just one level of patterns
    > created by value.
    >
    > DM said:
    > Disagree, how do you step out of consciousness or make consciousness an
    > object, consciousness is inevitably tied up with all experience/quality/
    > even so-called objects in the sense that you cannot really separate
    > subjects and objects -i.e. they always go together.
    >
    > Paul:
    > I had this discussion with Scott. By saying that "consciousness is
    > inevitably tied up with all experience" you seem to be equating
    > consciousness with Quality. If this is the starting point then it
    > follows that everything is consciousness. If you limit the definition of
    > consciousness to the intellectual level then value is "outside of"
    > consciousness as it is the *source* of consciousness.
    >
    > A problem with equating Quality with consciousness is that it tends to
    > lead to an idealist metaphysics and then onto an "absolute mind" or
    > "divine reason" or "mind of God." This becomes difficult/impossible to
    > pin down empirically the way Pirsig does with value and we are back to
    > faith.
    >
    > Regards
    >
    > Paul
    >
    >
    >
    > 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 : Sat Jan 31 2004 - 17:56:31 GMT