[MD] The differentiating nothingness

[Heather Perella]

Hello,

     Ham said:  "You're beginning to speak like a true
Pirsigian --
> probably without even
> realizing it.
> 
> Look at what you are saying ...
> 
> > Maybe quality is not alone in being able to
> describe
> > and fit with everything in reality.  Consciousness
> is
> > another concept that fits with everything, yet,
> does it
> > emanate from everything as well?

> Consciousness "fits" with everything only because it
> experiences everything.
> It doesn't "emanate" at all.  It is the awareness of
> your self.  Do YOU
> emanate?
     
     Exactly, consciousness fits with everything just
as you say above.  Do I emanate?  Sure, when I project
and try to figure out who I am and realize I am only
because everything else is as well (earth and sky)
 
> And, would you ever have said this before you
> started reading LILA?

     I would not have included the word quality, but
now that I understand as much as I do about quality, I
use the word quality.


> > Maybe, it would be difficult to say rocks have
> consciousness,
> > yet, how would we be able to detach the realm of
> consciousness
> > from anything we come to know since consciousness
> is
> > always present in order for us to become
> knowledgeable
> > about anything?
> 
> "The REALM of consciousness"?   Since when is
> consciousness a realm?   Since
> you became indoctrinated to the MoQ -- that's when.

     Well, if I say consciousness instead of realm of
consciousness, which the latter only means the place
where consciousness is, so all I said here is what you
first stated above.  Consciousness fits with
everything.


> > Quality seems to be similar to this kind of
> understanding.
> > Quality cannot be detached from anything in
> reality, thus,
> > quality is everywhere in reality (beingness or
> existence).
> > Yet, its undefine-ability found in DQ patterns
> where
> > creativity sprouts is where existence comes into
> being.

 
> What we perceive as "quality" is the value of a
> thing to us.  Quality
> doesn't hang out in "DQ patterns" floating around in
> existence.  It's your
> own feeling of being pleased or disappointed with
> what you experience.
> Unless you are using quality to mean the specific
> "properties" of a thing
> (not what Pirsig meant), it is your experience of
> its value.

     Floating around in existence.   Well, I do
experience what 'floats in existence' when I do
experience it, so I guess I am talking about my
experience and the value I have with the experience. 
Each new experience would be dynamic.  Whether we
experience speciation in the rock strata or when we
wake up in the morning, we experience these values as
they are experienced by us.  

 
> > DQ is actualization of something that wasn't and
> now is.
> > This type of description of actualization I would
> say
> > mirrors your negation or differentiation of
> Essence.
> 
> Actually, I think SQ is supposed to be the
> actualized mode of existence.

     Yeah, but what of that which is creative,
undefined, yet, seen on the horizon.  Could become
static, but I think it is still dynamic, yet, all in
all it is still quality being experienced.

 
> > Could we go any further into understanding how DQ
> does
> > what it does or how something is negated (Essence
> is
> > negated)?  I am leaning towards no, because things
> > negated would be as far as our intellect would
> take
> > us.  Existence is as far as our intellect goes. 
> To
> > actually know something before or while it is
> negating
> > would not be appearing, knowable, and definable.
 
> Of course we can't "know something" before it
> exists.  We can't even know
> absolute truth. But we can know the paradigm or
> scheme for creation.  That's
> what a metaphysical concept is; it's not
> hallucinating about pre-negated
> things or about extending your intellect into the
> essential source.  It's
> not about putting yourself into a trance and
> dreaming about a fantasy world.
> It's making logical inferences about what we can't
> describe or imagine.

     How do you make logical inferences about
something you can't describe or imagine to begin with?
 

> SA, you used to make sense to me.  Now that you've
> let the MoQ levels into
> your thinking, you talk of attaching yourself to
> Consciousness and about
> Quality as "the DQ patterns where creativity
> sprouts."  Frankly, you've lost
> me.  That is not my conception of existence, and
> it's all gibberish to me
> from here on.

     Gibberish, you haven't been able to solidify one
thing in your thesis.  Anytime you try to, a debate
begins, and a lot of times you find yourself going
back over the same old ground and rethinking what you
previously said and you start all over again.

 
> I predicted this would happen when you became
> indoctrinated, and it clearly
> has.  You have adopted 'Qualityspeak' as your own
> language, and we just
> can't communicate anymore.

     Doesn't your thesis have a way to communicate
with everything existing in the world?  Or haven't you
gotten to the point where you can communicate and
provide clarity whether in your thesis or other
perspectives.  I have delved into your thesis,
communicated with you, and showed you where your
thesis needs patched up, but you can't even take one
step into another persons world and logically point
out where their mistakes or non-mistakes are, except
to say they talk about quality.  I thought a thesis,
especially a general philosophical thesis, was
supposed to be able to clear things up for everybody?
     Is it quality that allows me to delve into others
philosophies/perspectives and see what they see?  I
don't know.  I do know that I have been open-minded
before I read ZMM, Lila (which I still have 100 pages
or so left), and joined the MOQ.org.  I live in the
woods, meditate, and have a family.  I work with
children who's worlds are very confusing and angry at
times.  So clarity has to be a mainstay of my
lifestyle or else I would go under into the
place/realm of chaos.  So that's why I walk in the
woods, go fishing, meditate, and have a family, so I
can have the valuable support needed to generate a
quality experience that provides the clarity to be
clear minded, focused, and open with a listening ear
with life.

     By the way Ham, sure I would eventually use words
like quality, value, and moral as stated by Marsha as
follows (she brings a lot of clarity to what happens
when you dial 'moq.org' into your computer address): 
"You silly ham, haven't you ever noticed that the name
of this website and list is 'The Metaphysics of
Quality'?


SA

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