[MD] Core problemS

[Heather Perella]

Ron,

     Are you suggesting that what I said deals with "substance" and not experience?  If so, maybe I'm either not communicating very well or maybe I do try to define events as "substances"?

SA


--- On Thu, 8/28/08, Ron Kulp <RKulp at ebwalshinc.com> wrote:

> From: Ron Kulp <RKulp at ebwalshinc.com>
> Subject: Re: [MD] Core problemS
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Date: Thursday, August 28, 2008, 3:07 AM
> Ron,
> 
>     I find this to be contradictory and I know we (as in
> this forum)
> have had discussion on whether the levels are continuous
> and overlap, or
> are discrete and conflict.  But, maybe what I put forward
> below might
> help clarify these two seemingly contradictory passages by
> Pirsig.
>   
>     My take on levels and what's between the levels:  I
> find static
> quality to emerge from dynamic quality, thus, it's not
> linear for me,
> it's more like rising mountains.  Here's my
> analogy.  The valleys are
> dynamic quality and the mountains rising out of dynamic
> quality are
> static quality.  Static quality rising out of dynamic
> quality, but never
> detaches from dynamic quality.  One could still find
> dynamic quality in
> the mountains with the blooming flowers emerging from the
> mountains, so,
> in this case, the mountains are dynamic quality and the
> blooming
> emerging flowers are static quality.  Simply put, static
> quality emerges
> out of dynamic quality but never detaches from dynamic
> quality and
> between static patterns one may find dynamic quality as the
> transitional
> state between static patterns where the static patterns are
> not readily
> defined.
> 
> 
>      Anyways, to not detract from your original question
> too far, I find
> this to be very conflicting.  Pirsig says one thing and
> then says the
> complete opposite, unless...  When Pirsig says 'but not
> all biological
> patterns are social' this is the discrete part.  What
> about the 'all
> social patterns are biological', maybe the defining
> here is not focused
> on 'What are the social patterns', so, therefore
> the definition is about
> biological patterns only, but once one defines the social
> patterns or
> the social patterns emerge from the biological patterns a
> clear
> distinction can be made, thus, a clear discrete
> categorization can be
> developed.  To make a clear distinction between social and
> biological
> patterns, they need to be discrete patterns, patterns that
> differ from
> each other.
> 
> 
> what do you think?
> 
> Ron:
> I still believe seeing Quality as a substance is the wrong
> way to go.
> I think Quality as description of experience comes closer
> to what
> Pirsig is talking about. Experience is infinitely definable
> thus
> remains undefined.
> 
> I'd like to hear what others think before I chime in
> any further.
> 
> Thanks SA
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/