Re: MD Truth

From: David MOREY (
Date: Tue Oct 21 2003 - 20:50:23 BST

  • Next message: "Re: MD Truth"


    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.

    David M
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 10:02 PM
      Subject: Re: MD Truth

      Hi Mark

      Thank you. I think there may be a connection between Ratio and rta. I
      must look into that.

      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.

      From what you say here, it appears that any rational enquiry is in fact
      a pattern of discovery in response to DQ.

      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!

      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

      That sounds right.

      Thus, a fine line must be walked between filling your experience full of
      static patterns and allowing yourself to float between them.

      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.

      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!

      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!]



      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?

    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 21 2003 - 20:59:15 BST