Doug Renselle (renselle@on-net.net)
Sun, 18 Jan 1998 07:34:35 +0100
Hi TLS and Hugo,
Hugo Fjelsted Alroe wrote:
>
> On the principles:
>
> >3. Dynamic Quality and static quality.
> >The best way to divide Quality is into patterns of Dynamic and static
> >value or experience. Dynamic Quality is pure unfiltered experience.
> >Static quality is stable distinguishable experience. Dynamic Quality
> >creates the world; static quality preserves it. Dynamic Quality is
> more
> >pleasing than static quality. Dynamic Quality is more moral than
> static
> >quality.
>
> Magnus said:
> >You can't compare DQ and SQ, it's like comparing green-ness and mass.
> >Too much DQ is chaos, too much SQ is stagnation. Why not cut the
> >principle after "Dynamic Quality creates the world; static quality
> >preserves it."? I like that.
>
> I second that.
>
> And I think this is very close to what Doug R. says below. Is this
> correct,
> Doug?:
> >My literal interpretation of Pirsig's words, cast forward in time
> from
> >1974 to now tells me that he is saying this: Quality is definable
> and
> >undefinable. The part which is definable is Static Quality. The
> part
> >which is undefinable is Dynamic Quality.
Hugo,
Magnus and I possess much different contexts, however, you, Hugo plus
Magnus, Platt, and I share common sensitivities on the definability of
the two divisions of Quality. I believe we align with Pirsig on this
one.
I believe that what Magnus says is correct and that my most recent memo
on the MoQ Uncertainty Principle is correct and they both align with
what Pirsig mentors to all of us.
Further, the MoQ Uncertainty Principle adds an ingredient which provides
essential alignment with the new science.
I hope we all reach concord on this issue.
Diana, is there some way to assess the whole Squad's views on this?
Perhaps you might poll each separately, accumulate stats and see what
the think? I'll do it if you prefer, if you think it is a good idea.
That might tell us how far from arriving we are? What do you think?
Platt, Magnus, Hugo, Ant, Bo, Dave, Ken, Lars, Gene, etc. And why
aren't Jason and Matt contributing here? Where are you?
The hum is getting louder...
Mtty,
Doug Renselle.
>
...
> Thanks to Diana for providing this common basis for a further
> discussion of
> the principles.
>
Hugo,
YES!! Look at the rewards we are gaining!
Doug.
> Regards
>
> Hugo
> alroe@email.dk or alroe@vip.cybercity.dk
>
-- "The cause of our current social crises,..., is a genetic defect within the nature of reason itself."By Robert M. Pirsig, in 'Zen & the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance,' p. 102 (paperback), Bantam, 28th edition, May 1982.
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:38 CEST