[MD] Some historical perspective

[MarshaV]

Ego disclaimer:     

To put a little historical perspective into this and a foot firmly on the
ground, I must confess I am vey high on Beethoven.   





-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of MarshaV
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 6:30 AM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Some historical perspective


Oh...  It's the old flatlander problem.  Dynamic Quality is red; static
quality is blue; the MoQ is a royal purple pyramid. -  ??? -  Just radiate
quality and morality will be served.  I don't know.  Seriously, I don't
think it's too much of a problem.  It's time has come.   



-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Ian Glendinning
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 6:13 AM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Some historical perspective

No you're not Marsha (being too idealist), you're dead right.
The problem with "transcend" is not with the transcending, it is
simply how to depict it in a mental model that comprises only the 4
static PoV levels - the pinnacle of which is SOMism.

They say a picture paints a thousand words - so when someone says what
is this MoQ you speak of, can you draw me a picture - what do you do ?
Say No ? How do you draw "transcending" ?

Logically, it is fine to say - this is a monism - the arete / quality
/ care / love doesn't appear "in" the picture because the whole
picture is built out of the stuff - and of course we are right back to
the map / terrain - finger / moon - Paul Turner discussion.

Transcendence ? Another activity in another layer / dimension ? The
map doesn't have to be in simple 2D.
(Space-time is a good deal weirder than Bo presumes - even
transfigural maybe - but that's another story.)

(Here, I'm just trying to construct a communicable mental image - to
share with other humans. Something tangible here and now "on one page"
to add to the entire evolutionary historical narrative - not to
replace it. We are quite used to making the mental distinction between
a representation and the represented being different things, of
different kinds. When we draw a black line on a map representing a
road, we don't get all confused and try to drive down the black line
do we ?)

Let me draw you a picture.
Ian

On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 10:42 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
> Maybe why 'superposition' has been of such interest to me.  Maybe from the
> Quality-Level a superposition is established.
>
> Please present an intellectual static pattern of value that doesn't
> represent a self that manipulates something.
>
> Something better than intellectual patterns?  Activity based on caring.
> Wouldn't that sort of represent arête?  Why struggle to transform
> intellectual patterns when you can transcend them?
>
> Am I being too idealist?  I don't think so.
>
>
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/

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/