From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Tue Oct 21 2003 - 20:50:23 BST
Hi
yes, I think the fact that when you talk about DQ you start talking about SQ almost immediately
and vice-versa is really great thing about MOQ, with SOM dualism you get into all sorts of idealism/materialism
polar corners.
regards
David M
----- Original Message -----
From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: MD Truth
Hi Mark
Mark:
Thank you. I think there may be a connection between Ratio and rta. I
must look into that.
Paul:
You are well placed to look into it, given your study of Indian
philosophy. Going well?
Mark 20-10-03: Yes thank you, it is a delight. Correspondence with the MoQ makes me feel right at home.
Mark:
From what you say here, it appears that any rational enquiry is in fact
a pattern of discovery in response to DQ.
Paul:
I think it is not so much that ANY rational enquiry is a response to
Dynamic Quality, but more that Dynamic Quality is not necessarily
excluded from the creative process of rational enquiry.
Mark 20-10-03: I have convinced myself that DQ can never be excluded. It is a matter of degree to which DQ is discovered in relationships? I am of course open to modifying this view!
Mark:
Does this indicate that the term 'inventor' is misleading? Surely an
inventor is one who lets go of static patterning and opens up to Dynamic
intervention.
Paul:
That sounds right.
Mark:
Thus, a fine line must be walked between filling your experience full of
static patterns and allowing yourself to float between them.
Paul:
Indeed, in all aspects of life - the "middle way" of Buddha seems to fit
with that approach.
Mark 20-10-03: Facinating. I am learning about his teachings now.
Mark:
I watched an interview with Michael Caine the other night who told a
story of advice he heard given in a lecture to a business school. The
lecturer responded to a questioner seeking advice for business students
by telling him to drop out!
Paul:
There is something in that advice; if you stick rigidly to old patterns
and techniques you will find yourself left behind. In fact, the business
world is full of static-Dynamic tension if you look closely at it. In my
experience the trouble is that businesses often don't have the concepts
to deal with it and make the best of it.
[I bet the lecturer you mention would be upset if all of his students
followed that advice!]
cheers
Paul
Paul, a thought occurred to me. I should like to hear what you make of it? It is this: No matter at which point one begins exploring the MoQ, one discovers that the particular area of enquiry implicates all other aspects of the MoQ.
I apologise if this is a naive statement. But it occurs to me that the MoQ is not foundationalist? One may state that Quality is the empirical grounding of reality, and that may sound foundationalist. But if one begins to apply the MoQ, as we have done concerning truth for example, then all other areas align themselves in a coherent unity.
To give an example: We discuss the intervention of DQ in rational enquiry. This begs the question, 'Who is enquiring?' We move from the epistemic utility of value to the ontological status of individuals. Individuals are patterns of evolutionary related levels of SQ in a continuum - a relationship with DQ. This being so, DQ can never be excluded from rational enquiry?
Mark
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 : Tue Oct 21 2003 - 20:59:15 BST