David,
Thanks for the great outline and I find it to be a great roadmap... I had a
few other questions/comments to make for the last 5 sections but I figured
I'd tackle those tomorrow. I strongly agree with most of what you said, but
here are my handful of platypus... maybe somebody can answer me a little
better or tell me I'm full of hogwash... :)
>1) All of reality is composed of Quality. The universe IS Quality. All
>is Quality.
I know this is splitting hairs but.... nothing IS quality... everything is
of a *degree* of quality, I don't think anything is all quality. Personally
I think it is more that the universe is of Quality. There may well be
things of Quality outside the scope of our universe that we cannot grasp and
our humble universe couldn't contain. Also the idea that just because I'm
in the universe denotes every attribute of me is in it as well seems eerie.
I'd prefer to think that my thoughts are outside of normal space time
reality and leave it at that.
>2) The MOQ divides all of reality into two kinds of Quality; static and
>Dynamic.
Just as any other state though might there be something in between this hard
difference? Positive and Negative numbers are separated by zero. Voltage
levels have leading and tailing edges. What is the transition "between"
static and dynamic quality called? Is there one? I would like to argue
that something that now seems very dynamic at the time will eventually seem
very static. Somebody had to come up with the alphabet which must have been
mind blowing but today seems totally common place. Why is that?
>3) All of phenomenal reality is composed of static Quality. Any "thing"
>in the universe that can be measured, defined or concieved IS static
>Quality. All of the known and knowable universe is made of static
>Quality.
Everything? That's quite a lot :). While thinking about this statement I
was toying with the idea that possibly once it is measurable or defined it
becomes static but I'm not so sure about that. I reckon that it depends on
your point of view if something is static or dynamic. To me a bacteria
could be very static (seen one, you've seen 'em all) but from a physical
standpoint it is *very* dynamic and changes very rapidly.
>4) Dynamic Quality is ultimately undefinable, beyond words and concepts.
>DQ is the mystical reality. It is the ground of all being. It is the
>source of all "things". It is the living force behind all evolution and
>also the goal of that evolution.
Wow... that is a cool quote!
>5) In the MOQ Quality is always spelled with a capitol "Q". Although
>Pirsig has effectively invented a new concept, his word "Quality" still
>bears a resemblance to the common meaning. In both cases the word
>implies excellence, goodness and refinement. Of course these
>connotations apply to both static and Dynamic Quality.
As I understand it, quality is our perception of Quality. Quality is
everything and I don't think there is any inherent goodness or badness about
it, it just is. Our perceptions of Quality give us quality which allows us
to further understand goodness or badness from a personal point of view.
Thank you all!
Greg
MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:43 GMT