From: Mari (mld2001@adelphia.net)
Date: Thu Dec 26 2002 - 15:58:19 GMT
Hi Matt,
As much as i complain about certain things here in the MoQdg so
far it's all worth the time i spend pondering what gets tossed around.....
There are some contributors that i disagree with in all or part yet i marvel
at the way they say what they have to say. i don't recall your Sept
postings so i'll check it out later in our archives. Until then i want to
see if i understand how this works:
Matt: "I think we need to leave much of religion and philosophy and
> other paths towards self-perfection out of the public discourse. When I
> say that the MoQ is a bad public instructor, I'm saying that philosophy is
> a bad master over politics. Philosophy, however, can be a good servant."
Mari says: i'm really wanting to understand what you are saying here Matt.
When does philosophy move ( morph ) from "servant" to "master"? Now in this
very moment (and forward) i would like nothing more than to "get it" to
"understand" what you (anyone)mean(s). If it makes sense, i have absolutely
no problem what-so-ever adopting your (that) POV. That said i would hope the
same holds true for you. i don't want to waste any time arguing my point if
it's discovered to have holes in it, it wouldn't serve me and those around
me well to not let go of that which does not work best.
[ If i ever get around to talking about my play it might become clear why
all the different voices are needed exactly as the are.]
"...what this discussion
site was designed for...." is what?
It seems to me that on
some level to some degree "philosophy" is the underpinning of everything
that everyone does. Steve said: " Everyone is spiritual whether they know it
or not if the universe is
based on value not material" Even an atheist has a philosophy that becomes
the spirit of his beliefs and shows up in much if not all of what he
is/does.
It also occures to me that when people unite in their philosphies they
become a level 3 with-in a level 3 they become for instance republicans or
democrates and in that level 3 state effect change through the power of
their unification. In most cases if you ask me they become 'it' to a fault
and that's where things get blurry and problematic.( leave that discussion
for another time perhaps )
Matt said:
> This isn't to say that if people want to use this discussion group as a
> public rallying point to gather support for world changes they shouldn't.
> This is a medium of communication and I don't wish to limit its
> capabilities by saying what can't or shouldn't be on or expressed here.
My
> main point was that those who come to this discussion group shouldn't
> _expect_ to find a major social movement and then condemn it for not
having
> one. The people who want and expect a major social movement, rather then
> carping at those who are of a different opinion, should start that social
> movement. It is incumbent upon them, not those who view the MoQ or Pirsig
> as inspiration in their own path towards self-perfection. It is the
> difference between Party Members and Fellow Travelers.
>
> At the bottom of all this is the suggestion that people don't need to have
> read Pirsig to make Quailty decisions. I think all people make Quality
> decisions at some point, some maybe more then others. What Pirsig helps
us
> do is clarify in our own minds what might help us make Quality decisions
in
> the future. But to think that Pirsig might help this clarification in all
> people, helping all people make, what we call, Quality decisions, I think
> is a basic mistake that liberal democracies, with their emphasis on the
> private pursuit of happiness, won't, nor should, put up with. I think we
> should express to the world our own obsession with Pirsig, express to them
> how Pirsig has helped us, but I think that that is all we, or anybody,
> should do. I don't think we should demand that everyone become obsessed
> with Pirsig. I don't think its required of us to help make the world a
> better place.
Mari says: Do you think a few of us as you say: "
> _expect_ to find a major social movement and then condemn it for not
having
> one. "? To be honest i do have some "expectations" and although i can see
some down side to having them i don't automatically think of "expectations"
as such a bad thing. That they do not come to fruition at times leaves me in
varying states of disappointment, frustration, disbelief, anger or it can be
viewed objectively as a measure of how i see things differently than others.
When the MoQ is running well my affect does not get assauted by that which
is happening. When it is not working well i take thing personally and
precive that things are happening "to me". It seems to me <g> that this is
the place and view that most people (western influenced) have of life and
the circumstances in and about life.(things happen to them rather than just
happen) That perspective comes with bad vibes as part of it's properties and
no·men·cla·ture. And if you've noticed it is everywhere in great
numbers....there is a lot a bad attitude out there in the river of
consciousness with which we all swim.
So i am ISO others with whom i can resonate.///working to lessen and perhaps
eliminate the bad vibes through agreement and right use of will. If the
resonance is powerful enough, bigger change will occur thru unified
co-operation. That i see the potentiality here (MoQ.org) for greater things
in and of itself is not something that i "expect" will happen but do think
it's possible of happening here more than elsewhere ( other places that i
have explored so far [ i have some ideas about the world or 'art' but that
needs a different page] )....it would help greatly if things could move
beyond "the arguement" stage....pick a subject, run it through a MoQ filter,
create a plan to move forward, assign jobs, report back with progress
report, adjust as need-be using MoQ as a measure and method to stay
true....i'm making this up as i'm going along....this is where someone else
can jump in instead of argueing why that won't work or why this is not the
place for that and all the other verbage that seems to be what happens here
a lot! All this said Matt i selfishly would rather have nothing change at
all than to not have MoQdg.... because it motivates me into action.....maybe
motivating someone else into action...maybe combining forces, creating
practical action that shows in level 3 and level 4 evolution.....in a way
that's what happened when Pirsig moved ZMM into the public eye....i think
something can grow from here into the public domain. i am not sure who here
agrees with that....
Matt said:
> p.s. On your suggestion about a play, I would only warn you about
> attempting to group-write anything, let alone dialogue. As you may have
> noticed, there are a disparate number of voices on this site and I don't
> think they'll be unifying anytime soon (nor do I think they should) ;-)
>
> If you are serious about it, choose who you collaborate with wisely.
Mari says: Ironic, but what i want IS "disparate" voices speaking their mind
well unifying by contrast if all gets written well. And yes, it is important
to choose wisely my collaboraters.....many voices speaking as one
mind......om
Respectfully,
i
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 Dec 26 2002 - 16:03:07 GMT