[MD] What all is about.

[Ron Kulp]

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Ham Priday
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:45 AM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] What all is about.


Dear SA in your "cloudy woods" --


>     Ham, I guess my questions were too difficult for
> you.  I do see here that you defined nihilism
> according to Ham.  Have you ever heard of dynamic
> quality?  Dynamic quality "does not have a rational
> (i.e., empirical) explanation."  Again Ham you fail to
> know the basic 101 moq stuff, but I fail to know the
> basic 101 essence thesis of Ham, but then again I've
> already said I find that thesis to have a little if
> any value.  When I try to screw in a screw do I use a
> hammer or a screwdriver?  What would be of more value
> in this situation?  The screwdriver of course, and so
> the hammer has little if no value in this event.

Clearly the answers you want are not to be found in a philosophy of
Essence. 
Pirsig's "moral" philosophy is constructed on Quality, and he defines 
existence as a hierarchy of quality levels.  As Bo said, he sees "his
task 
to be that of uniting science and art."  When an author makes philosophy
an 
art form, he takes liberties that demean both Art and Science.  Anyone
who 
has studied Science knows that it is limited to acquiring factual
knowledge 
about the properties and relations of the empirical world.  Artists, on
the 
other hand, seek self-expression through creative works that appeal to
the 
esthetic senses.  To combine the two is like trying to make music out of
a 
drill press.

[Ron]
I have that album, Pink Floyd : umagumma disc A side two I believe. 
Ham, I have to tend to disagree with your statement above. On the 
Contrary I believe combining the two enhances both. Two sides of
The same coin in my opinion. 

[Ham]
My metaphysical philosophy is founded on absolute Essence, and its value
is 
what relates subjective awareness to objective otherness.  

Ron:
The more I understand the more I see Essence as dynamic quality and
Value sensibility as static quality. You use definitions that explain
This conceptual form to your understanding by fulfilling your need for
Spiritual resolve. I do not devalue this one bit. But it is what you are
doing. If you derive meaning and purpose from this perspective then it
Valuable indeed. But It sounds as if you propose a god for the
intellectual.
Which conceptually works well if I do say so. The angle is and I speak
for
Myself, is I like the idea of Dynamic Quality simply because it is
faceless
And up to interpretation. It places universal responsibility square on
my own shoulders and for some reason this sits well with me and my
understanding. Ideally if I agree to anyone's concepts other than the
Individual formulation of my own, I'd be defeating the very purpose of
the understanding of Essence and quality.