[MD] Hippies in Sodom and Gomorrah

[Heather Perella]

Hello Everybody!

Is the conservative - static quality?  
Is the hippiedom - dynamic quality?
Or, is one or both of these closer to general Quality?
 
     If these fit the static or dynamic roles of
quality, then maybe to notice Quality (not just the
static and dynamic roles or concentrated aspects of
Quality) the second word attached to static and
dynamic, which is quality, needs to be remembered as
being with both of these aspects of Quality.  The
experience of any such Quality in a society may at
times find concentrated aspects of Quality scoped into
focus as static and dynamic.  These concentrated
aspects of Quality (static and dynamic) are pulled
into their respective concentrations due to our
focusing upon these aspects of Quality in our
experience.  
     We can understand each other even as we
philosophically argue with each other, why?  Because
the debate about these concentrations we are enacting
with focused intention upon these particular aspects
of Quality in the end are still with the overall
generality taking place or experienced.  We call that
Quality.  
     Platt you brought up good, true, and beautiful,
but don't forget something can be of bad Quality, too.
 Something can exhibit a false Quality, and something
might be thought of as having a terrible or lacking of
Quality that we would call ugly.  What is still
present is Quality.  What also remains in play is a
static quality resisting or assisting a dynamic
quality, and vice versa.  It depends on the Quality of
'whatever it is' we are identifying, and what we are
concentrating upon as pertaining to 'whatever it is'
we may find ourselves focused on the static aspect or
dynamic aspect or just the general Quality of the
experience itself.  
      None have to be right or wrong.  Conservative or
hippiedom, there is a Quality about those two playing
out their respective aspects that individuals may
identify, concentrate their attention as one of them
becomes seen more as static, dynamic, or somebody
might notice the general Quality peeping through one
or both of them.  This is because Quality (if we take
Pirsigs route) would be involved in any events, even
such events as conservatism or hippiedom.  Yet, which
one is more of a concentration of Quality, thus, being
either a static or dynamic aspect of quality, and
which one is more of the general Quality itself?  I
would say we do the concentrating, thus, from each of
us as individuals, you could look at any one thing (or
multiple things) determine how much you yourself want
to concentrate upon the general Quality of that
'thing' and come up with a philosophical argument that
reflects how much you are concentrating upon the
general Quality of 'it'.  In the case of conservatism
and hippiedom the general Quality of both of them
might be noticed as the general culture and/or
society, in which the Quality of is being discussed. 
Coming up with the more concentrated aspects of this
general Quality known as static and dynamic quality
might be identified as either conservatism, hippiedom,
one not the other, or neither.  I think we need to
consider where our focus is and how much we are
concentrating upon the Quality of (in this case) the
society/culture.  By doing so, our concentration upon
this Quality of the society/culture may lead one into
a static slant or a dynamic slant in any discussion of
its' Quality, and in the end we all are noticing a
Quality about the society/culture that we are either
in the midst of spreading (dynamic) or keeping as is
(static).  Some avenues might need dynamic change and
some may not (static resistance), but sometimes on the
surface of the discussion the static resistance may be
coming from something more assumed, deeper, and not as
explicitly apparent in the discussion, yet, resistance
is noticed.  At other times, a call for change is in
the discussion coming from something more assumed,
deeper, and not as explicitly apparent in the
discussion, too.  So we are trying to delve to the
root (as Khaled said) of the where and why we are
approaching the discussion from a static or dynamic
position.  Yet, the root itself where the distinctions
come about in the discussion, are rooted in Quality
itself, and that has any discussion have a certain
appeal to Quality from either position involved. 
Static positions appeal to Quality, and dynamic
positions appeal to Quality.  Thus, the persuasion or
logic of any position is on equal intellectual
footing.  
     When might dynamic quality need to replace any
static patterns or static quality resist any dynamic
patterns?  The arguments come forth, the debate
begins, and the MOQ (MOQ.org) is here allowing these
to take place.  How long til an answer?  Answers are
not always found in print.  Wise answers find their
place in actions taking place upon the field called
earth passed through the realm we call sky.

SA       

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