[MD] Thus spoke Lila

[118]

[Mark]
Interesting that some in this who claims to be anti-religion would put
so much emphasis into the mystical.  For whatever reason, there seems
to be a disconnect by some as to what the mystical actually
symbolizes.  It is no different from what most people call the
spiritual.  Once it is understood that the DQ/SQ is exactly the same
as the spiritual/physical divide, maybe then those who subscribe to
MOQ can fully integrate themselves into the human experience, and not
remain out in the cold, uncomprehending.

This is an age old question, akin to the mind body one.  We have
things which we do not understand yet say they exist (spiritual), and
those things we do think we understand (physical).  Mystical sages
have always been spiritual and subscribe to theistic notions.  It is
hard to understand why the consideration of the spiritual aspect of
life is of such distaste to some, especially if they subscribe to the
notion of DQ as dmb describes below.

Perhaps there are some distinctions between DQ and spiritual.  If so,
I would like to learn what those are.

Cheers,
Mark

On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 2:06 PM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Horse said:
> ... The whole point of DQ/Mysticism in the MoQ sense is that it can only be experienced and not known. Or perhaps I've got it wrong. Anyone else agree or disagree?
>
>
> dmb says:
> Right, DQ is very often described in terms of what it is NOT. It is not intellectually knowable, not conceptual, not verbal, not differentiated or divided. Any kind of knowledge or thought category is going to be static and conceptual. DQ is none of those things precisely because the first moment of awareness is prior to words, concepts and definitions. But it is experienced, felt and lived through and is "known" in that sense.
>
> I think the idea is that this continuing stimulus operates even when we're engaged with words, concepts and definitions. DQ is what guides the selection of hypothesis in science, for example. DQ is always co-operating with rational understandings, as in the case of the motorcycle mechanic. DQ is pre-intellectual, not anti-intellectual. Cultivating a sensitivity to this guiding factor should not entail a rejection of words, concepts or definitions in any way. Quite the opposite. You know, that whole lesson about Quality in the classroom writings back in Bozeman. Once the students knew that they knew what undefined Quality was, all the rules became a lot more interesting to them.
>
>
>
> 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/md/archives.html
>