[MD] Betternes - 4 levels of!

Sat Nov 6 05:51:57 PDT 2010

To conclude, 
I think Dynamic Quality IS being reduced
to a single, arrested concept with associating
it with meaninglessness. It retards any development
of thoughts, it's an idea once arrived at, hints at resting
on it.
Killing intellectual patterns is useful in times of stuckness
when we are faced with gumption traps. The now of experience
simplifies meaning by returning to the root, through this we 
often become unstuck in our thinking.
That is not reducing Dynamic quality to meaninlessnes or 
relativism that is recognizing it as the source of meaning
the grounding of our intellectual patterns to the most meaningful.

-Ron

----- Original Message ----
From: X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com>
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Sent: Sat, November 6, 2010 8:14:09 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Betternes - 4 levels of!

Andre, Dave,
I would be very interested to read what both of you have
to say on the matter of Ants explanation. I do not
posess a copy of Ants thesis. I would be most interested
as to the context.
The comment originated with Dan's response Andre, but
since you mention it I do believe remembering a quote 
of Ant's posted on the subject. 
I understand Dans reasons, or I atleast think I do.
But in the spirit of Daves statement of keeping our eye
on the ball, and not allowing our tools to dominate our thoughts,
I believe is the main point of what I'm attempting to discuss.

I probably should not write down why I believe some hold,
rather doggedly to the statement that Dynamic Quality
is unknowable and indefineable and to the drawn conculsion
from that statement that it is meaningless to try.
In my opinion one can't, no matter how hard they try to
reduce it to one whole complete concept, yet, I get the feeling that THAT
is exactly the kind of thing going on when the idea of DQ is
defended in such a way. Also, I feel the neti, neti, explanation
the "not this" not that" feeds into a type of nihlist stereotype
often projected on Pirsigs work. I understand it from an objective
context of nothing is an absolute whole, but within our own ranks
of Quality context, it takes on a different dynamic and becomes
Nihlism, a point of view that asserts meaninglessness over betterness.
I can understand why someone would choose an explanation in which
life is meaningless over an explanation that asserts that life is nothing
but meaningful and that is pain in ones life, the mistakes we have made
the inadequacy we feel, it's easier to deal with if there is no meaning
to it, but if betterness is introduced, then there is some accountability
for your actions and that can be very painful. 

-Ron

Thanks

-Ron

----- Original Message ----
From: Andre Broersen <andrebroersen at gmail.com>
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Sent: Sat, November 6, 2010 4:49:10 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Betternes - 4 levels of!

Dmb:

If Ant makes a distinction between Quality and value, I strongly suspect the 
interesting part would be the "why" and the "what for".

Andre:
Agreed dmb and point taken. I'm off to La Palma for a break. Computer stays 
home, 'The Writings of William James' A Comprehensive Edition by McDermott in 
the bag.

Cheers

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