[MD] The MOQ and Death

[Ham Priday]

Andre --

Let's recap, shall we?

On 3/9 at 1:25 PM, I admitted my unfamiliarity with Northrop, explaining why 
I regard any continuum as differentiated.

You said:
> That's fine Ham, but then you are not using the term the way
> the MoQ uses it, or the way 'Eastern' philosophies use it...or
> Northrop for that matter.

[My conclusion -- Pirsig and Eastern philosopers use common terms in 
unconventional ways.]

You also said:
> What is logically inconsistent about DQ/SQ?  They have both
> dependently arisen Ham. Quality does not exist in and of itself
> like some veil hanging behind the static patterns... as some
> Absolute 'entity'.
>
> Quality is what accounts for the dynamic 'aha' moments
> leading the MoQ to allow for a better explanation of SQ
> 'evolution'.

[Conclusion -- Quality sparks new or "dynamic" ideas, while an idea itself 
is a static pattern.]

I then asked:
> You stated above that DQ and SQ "have both dependently
> arisen."  Arisen from WHAT?  Dynamic and static notwithstanding,
> if Quality is not the primary source, what is it "dependent" on,
> and how can it "account for" evolution, existence, or anything else?

[Andre]:
> Seems you are desparately looking for a 'first' Absolute Ham.
> The MoQ does not buy into that.
>
> You keep on looking for 'logical' explanations Ham. The SOM
> variety.  I cannot provide you with those.

[Conclusion -- The MoQ rejects a first cause or primary source and has no 
use for logical explanations.]

[Ham]:
> This hierarchy scheme is a persistent source of confusion to me.
> Each new explanation offered only compounds the problem.

[Andre]:
> Within SOM ...yes.

But the relational S/O world (existence) is where logical rules are presumed 
to apply.  If you can't explain SO logically, how am I expected to 
understand the MoQ?

[Andre, previously]:
> Quality is what accounts for the dynamic 'aha' moments leading
> the MoQ to allow for a better explanation of SQ 'evolution'.

Andre, I've had 'Eureka!' moments of intuitive insight and ecstatic moments 
of aesthetic enjoyment.  But I've yet to experience a dynamic 'aha' moment 
of an explanatory nature.  If I ever have one, I can assure you I'll be able 
to explain it.

Thanks and regards,
Ham