[MD] Formalising the Code of Art (Rekindling with Mark Maxwell)

[Heather Perella]

Hey David H.

I'll give it a go.  I've read the archive paper 'Edge
of Chaos' and the conference paper.


==PATTERNISING DQ==

Mark 16-10-06: But if COA = DM = DQ that is precisely
what you are  
doing, unless as you suggest, it's the conditions
we're spelling  out.


     Oh my, a question already.  What is DM?


David 19-12-06:
That DQ appears where it does has nothing to do with
our static  
understanding.   Once you take notice of DQ, DQ
becomes sq, so DQ did not appear!  We can only hope to
allude to DQ and its existence  
through analogy and the like.  As I said above, the
better these  
analogies, the better the sq.


     David, why the need for dq, when we can't even
experience dq?


==BENEFITS OF COHERENCE==

Mark 16-10-06: That's why Coherence is more sq. But it
may be a  
appreciable addition to our sq understanding?

David 19-12-06:
To put your question another way.  Does Coherence IMHO
point to the  
moon well? No. This is because within Lila and the
structure of the  
MOQ there is already a concept which fits your desired
goal of  
'formulating a sq description where DQ shines
through'.  IMHO Rta  
answers this call of being an excellent finger
pointer, because if  
done rightly, removes the finger altogether.

[SA]     I see dq and excellence, and even spirit (not
to get caught up in the religious baggage of this term
or ghosts).  When discussing spirit I mean to also say
'when everything just seems to come together', when
something has spunk it has spirit, when a ceremony is
beautiful the spirit of the ceremony that aspect of
the ceremony that words can't really describe but yet
it's the whole ceremony in harmony or one might just
say the spirit of the ceremony was excellent: 
spirit=excellence.  Coherence is another harmonizing
understanding about an experience.  Coherence is when
'everything just seems to come together'.  So
excellence or spirit might suggests the 'life' of the
coherent event?  Yet, it seems coherence as in 'sweet
spot' is not separating the life of the event in
'which everything just seems to come together'.  I
could easily separate the 'life' of coherence, that is
the spirit or excellence of coherence, but coherence
does incorporate this 'life' or excellence.  I'm not
seeing the difference right now.


     [David H.]
In case you have forgotten, below is a paste of a
comment of mine  
from the 15-10-06 regarding rta.
"Of course, that is not to say there there won't be
times when we  
cannot see DQ.  Zen meditation or something of this
ilk helps to  
reduce these times through perfection of sq
patterns(rta) which  
reveals the DQ that has been there all along."
A perfected pattern is coherent. If you want to
contrive a situation  
where there is nothing but DQ, simply perfect a sq
pattern.  The  
easiest and most simple activity to perfect is to
'just sit'.  Don't  
DO anything, just sit.  If you sit there for long
enough, you will  
notice your mind winding down, and eventually once it
has wound down completely all that is left is 'just
sitting'. It is at this point  
enlightenment occurs.
------

[SA]   From this quote, I would have to agree
excellence and coherence are the same.  





David 19-12-06:
That is because the sq, the analogies of DQ, are
better.


[SA]     I'm not sure of the better here.  Why the
need for sq to be better than dq?  I use this notion. 
Sq latches upon dq, which is impossible, yet, the
effort is present for all is quality.  This latching
effort is therefore 'sq-returning-upon-its'-self' or
'sq-returning-upon-its'-no-self'.  Sq only is involved
in effort.  Sq can only return.  To return upon its'
no-self is to fulfill quality without the split.  Yet,
all that I am doing is putting this understanding into
static patterns for dq is nothing.  This returning
involves a 'breaking away-return'.  The breaking away
and if new static latch is available, then evolution
without degeneration.  Coherence works here, maybe
best, due to its' explanatory definition that implies
'togetherness', thus, when sq latches upon dq and
can't the sq effort returns upon its' self (no-self)
due to the coherence, the togetherness involved in
static quality.  As long as the coherence holds this
event is an enhancement, evolution, brightening,
excellent, new moment newly defined.  Sq breaks away
from its' self upon no-self and returns as something
newly defined.  Creative process. 





Mark 16-10-06: No, Chaos and Stasis are not
requirements. This is  
what  happens to sq when DQ is being blocked.
The requirement for DQ is coherence.
Meditation increases coherence. As Coherence becomes
ever more  
unifying DQ shines.

David 19-12-06:
The requirement for DQ is that there is no
requirement. As I'm  
repeatedly stating, if you want a signpost to DQ there
is only rta 
(Meditation), which is no requirement at all.  As
patterns become  
more perfected and coherent through rta, DQ shines.


[SA]     Mark is stating chaos, stasis, and coherence
offers explanation to when dq is blocked.  Dq isn't
always noticed, for instance, this mainstream U.S.
culture.  rta doesn't explain this.  Realization is
necessary.  Sure an excellent practice such as
meditation can be a practice in which is rta.  Yet,
the realization must occur.  rta isn't offering
explanation about chaos and stasis.  Pirsig discusses
cultural immune system and this fits in nicely with
chaos and stasis.  Creatively we may provide clarity
upon this perspective as to describe static patterns
as either being chaotic, stasis (tension might be
another term here to use for stasis or static is this
whole pattern we're describing, yet, here is more
specific), and coherent.  I also view this realization
of itself, thus, sq realizing dq, for sq can only
realize, is the same as saying quality realizing
itself.  Sq splitting from dq is quality realizing
itself.  Yet, what happens when static patterns no
longer latch upon dq or 'break
away-to-only-return-upon-its'-no-self', thus, this is
the same as saying sq renews itself.  Sq is no longer
its' old self or self.  Sq is not that self, thus, is
no-self.  Once we explain this no-self we are now
latching static patterns once again.  It's a creative
process.  What if this doesn't happen and realization
is dimmed or lost?  Dimmed=stasis and lost=chaotic
realizations occur.  Evolution is stifled or stuck.


thanks.

dog sleepin', baby sleepin', wide-awake
SA

P.S. Is Squonk Mark Maxwell?

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com