THE SELFAPPOINTED REFEREE GIVES LITHIEN A HINT, ASKS ROGER A
QUESTION AND ANSWERS MALBIN.
"Lithien" wrote on Thu, 17 Dec 1998
> dear kilian:
> you ask the same question that was on my mind last night when i nearly
> jumped out of my computer chair as i heard the bombing on Irag start on tv.
LITHIEN
As the selfappointed referee I must ask you to look to the rules: not
more than one message a day, don't reproduce the whole "original
message", only the portions you want to respond to. I'm not able to
read from the screen and my copy paper bill is sky high :-) And
absolutely no politics!!!!
Of course, everything fits inside the Q hierarchy, but to start on
what level such and such phenomenon "belongs" to show a lack of
understanding of the MOQ basics. It is asking what it
OBJECTIVELY is. When focussed on the Social level I take sides
in conflicts, when on the Intellect I condemn ALL conflicts. No,
let's stick to the general Quality idea, it wraps itself all over
such temporal affairs.
***************************************************************
ROGER!
Forget my talk about kindergarten :-) You are the last to need that,
but to start on square one with every newcomer is exhausting. You are
a master of summaries and I would have given much to have had a
general such of all of the Lila squad discussion - from day one. The
exchange from August 1998 is to be found at:
http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
(1997 will soon be included I hope)
So if you need some Christmas holiday activity, please start on such
job and see if it is possible to compress it into a manageable
form. I am trying to formulate the most usual fallacies when
approaching the MOQ.
******************************************************************
MALBIN
On Wed, 16 Dec 1998 Malbin Mendoza wrote:
> Hi Kilian & Bodvar, & all,
> For me its seems that the "argument" comes from the question "what
> is the purpose, or value, of MoQ?" From what I've read so far on
> this site, and granted i am new, it seems that the majority
> opinion is that the MoQ is the Truth, with a capital T. MoQ is the
> real way the universe works, and SOM is terribly wrong. But I
> don't subscribe to this. It seems to me that MoQ is a very good
> model of reality, one that has more quality than SOM, one that is
> more inclusive and illuminating. But its just that a model, the
> best myth for our times. As Pirsig says in ZAMM "Everything is an
> analogy." Every thing is an analogy! So what's the purpose of this
> analogy, this MoQ? It seems to me to be a rational path up the
> static mountain of reality to reach the summit of DQ. A road map,
> a traveler's companion, up the path of spiritual development,
> using the intellectual tool of reason and logic. But if you stay
> in the valley of discourse, of intellectual debate, of philosophy,
> then sadly you miss the whole point. The experience of Dynamic
> Quality itself, the experience Pirsig had, the experience mystics
> say they had.
I have no objections to your objections Malbin. The points you
stress I am fully aware of, and I don't think that you'll find the
word "truth" in any of the posts. I have said that the MOQ model
fits my experience and that might be interpreted as ....ahem
..truth. However "truth" is an Intellectual pattern of value
according to Pirsig and that fits my idea that the whole
subject-object complex is the Q-Intellect.
It is of course subtle things. If - as you say - we say:
> MoQ is the real way the universe works, and SOM is
> terribly wrong.
and that comes pretty close, how can it still be short of THE
truth?? Well, I play with the idea that the Quality notion is DQ's
attempt to free itself from even the highest static chains. That
means that it is a budding new Q-level. Don't you see the beauty of
it? Any higher level is "truth" to the lower, and if Intellect is
seen as SOM it is "wrong". Naturally!
Bodvar
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:45 BST