[MD] Intellect's Symposium

[plattholden at gmail.com]

Thanks for the clarification, Mark. We agree. 

Regards.
Platt



On 8 Feb 2010 at 17:57, markhsmit wrote:

> 
> Hi Platt,
> Yes, absolute.  I perhaps chose the wrong word with constant since at
> a lower level it means no change.  I am speaking of constant at a higher
> level, thus absolute.  I believe I interconvert the words in my post to DMB.
> 
> I could probably create some difference, but for the purposes I am using
> them for they are the same.
> Thanks,
> Mark
> Hey Mark,
> 
> Any difference between "constant" and "absolute?" I think they're the 
> same concept.
> 
> Regards,
> Platt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 7 Feb 2010 at 20:46, markhsmit wrote:
> 
> > Hi Magnus,
> > Stop putting words into my mouth, that is just annoying.
> > If you read what I said rather than what you think I said
> > it would be an improvement.  What do you think I mean
> > by constant?  That it doesn't evolve?  Perhaps you should
> > read Pirsig, because Quality does.  And what are your silly
> > analogies?  If you use the Titanic as an example of Quality
> > then you really have not got it, get it?  What does the Sound
> > of Music have to do with Quality?  If you believe that these
> > are examples, please reread Pirsig.
> > 
> > Pirsig's books state (yes, STATE) that Quality is a guiding
> > principle.  If that is not a claim to a constant then I do not know
> > what is.  Please do not retort with sophomoric analogies.
> > Go have your really good tasting pie, and call it Quality.
> > There really is more to the philosophy of Quality than that.
> > Think about it.
> > 
> > What is not constant in the claim for an underlying reality that is
> > called Quality?  Remember, I am not talking about a
> > fad.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Mark
> 
> > Ham
> > 
> > > Ham is referring to Pirsig's postulate that Quality equals Reality. This
> > > is inconsistent with his pronouncement that "experience is the cutting
> > > edge of reality." If Quality is fixed as a constant of the universe, it
> > > canot be modified or actualized by experience, for experience is
> > > relative to the subject 'I'. In short, experience serves no purpose in
> > > Pirsig's cosmology.
> > 
> > As always, you manage to jam so many wrongs into a paragraph that it's almost 
> > amusing, wasn't it for the fact that some new people might read it and think 
> > it's right.
> > 
> > Quality is not fixed. Have you ever read in ZMM or Lila that it's *fixed* or 
> > constant? Oh right, you haven't read any of them, silly me.
> > 
> > If Quality was fixed, the blockbuster Titanic would still be running each year, 
> > and everyone would be amazed at how great a movie it is and cry their way 
> > through. No other films would ever be made, because the best movie has already 
> > been made. Or perhaps they'd still be running "Sound of music", because nobody 
> > ever bothered to try to top that one.
> > 
> > So, can we agree that Quality is *not* constant?
> > 
> > 
> > In your world, perhaps experience is relative the subject, but in ZMM, one of 
> > the most basic and fundamental lessons learned by Phaedrus is the fact that 
> > experience is *NOT* subordinated the subject. It's the other way around. I know 
> > you don't agree with that, but if you weren't as arrogant as you obviously are, 
> > you might at least have the decency to at least try to get the most basic things 
> > about the MoQ right.
> > 
> > Magnus