RE: MD SOLAQI as a gift of understanding

From: Paul Turner (
Date: Mon Feb 02 2004 - 14:27:27 GMT

  • Next message: "RE: MD SOLAQI confirmed?"


    David said:
    Of course you cannot pin it down empirically because empiricism assumes
    SO divide.

    Only an empiricism that starts with a subject experiencing an object.

    Pirsig: "I think the trouble is with the word, "experience." ....In a
    subject-object metaphysics, this experience is between a pre-existing
    object and subject, but in the MOQ, there is no pre-existing subject or
    object. Experience and Dynamic Quality become synonymous....So in the
    MOQ experience comes first, everything else comes later. This is pure
    empiricism, as opposed to scientific empiricism, which, with its
    pre-existing subjects and objects, is not really so pure." [Lila's Child

    David said:
    How do you think of quality in a non-conscious way?

    I can't *think* of anything in a non-conscious way. Thinking and
    experiencing are not the same thing in the MOQ.

    David said:
    If quality is experienced then quality is within consciousness.

    Not if thinking and experiencing are not the same thing.

    David said:
    My problem with idealism is with its closure and failure to make room
    for DQ. Consciousness, however, clearly is a concept that seems to hint
    at/imply DQ. I think that we
    use terms that overlap at various points. I like to think that we start
    with a sort of
    experiece/quality/conscious/free/value/care/Being/Be(com)ing whole and
    then move on to a SQ/DQ differentiation followed by the full and never
    ending differentiation of all SQ. I do think consciousness is closely
    tied to DQ, Heidegger calls it the clearing into which Being gathers.

    If you equate consciousness with DQ then you have to explain the
    difference between consciousness as DQ (mystic consciousness) and
    consciousness as intellect (regular consciousness), so you end up with
    two terms anyway - static and Dynamic Consciousness. In the MOQ we
    already have a metaphysical monism in "Quality." I can't see what good
    is gained from equating Quality with consciousness, but I can see the
    negative effect of partially defining what has been deliberately left



    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 : Mon Feb 02 2004 - 14:33:55 GMT