[MD] BioCentrism: Was Zeno correct?

[118]

Hi Adrie,
Thanks for that.  I guess the premise is whether, reality is motionless or
not.  Certainly through a view of SOM and Cause/Effect, reality appears to
be in motion.  At least that would be the perception.  Zeno was not looking
at people walking and such, but at underlying paradoxes, which is also an
appropriate inquiry.  He may be pointing more to the inability of logic to
provide description to reality.  As such, the use of motion is incomplete,
and paradoxical.

So my question to your Adrie, is whether you consider Quality to be in
motion or not.  I believe this is an appropriate question and cannot simply
be dismissed with the statement that Quality cannot be defined.  I am asking
for an opinion, as such it does not impose rigid definitive qualities.  So
is Quality in motion or not?  Those are the only two answers to choose from.
 If Quality equals reality as has been suggested then Quality is in motion.
 This would indeed be an important premise that we can discuss through the
request for more details on the nature of this motion.  Remember that I am
not asking about dynamic quality (DQ).

What say you about this detail?

By the way, my bird is from the Windup Bird Chronicle, by Murakami.  Good
book, give it a read if you have a chance, it may have been translated into
Flemish, or Dutch, or French.

Cheers,
Mark

On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 1:14 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com> wrote:

> (Adrie]



> Zam, Page 219
> quote
> "The followers of Heraclitus insisted the immortal priciple
> was change and motion.
> But Parmenides'disciple, Zeno,proved trough a series of
> paradoxes that any perception of motion and change is illusory.
> Reality had to be motionless."end.
>
> ------------------------------
> ---nothing changed
>
> comment, already here in zam Pirsig recognised that Zeno
> made a capital mistake.
> reality cannot be motionless.
>
> from this moment on, Pirsig will fight this static interpretation
> in all of his following work.
>
> What was Zeno's mistake? well this,
> "proved trough a series of paradoxes that any perception...etc"
>
> The error is a false observation from Zeno,a contaminated one,
> and Pirsig recognised it.
>
>
> He is dealing with it in the quote from the moq and time
> i presented,
>
> But in the metaphysiks of Quality itself he is shredding this to
>
> pieces totally.
>
> We have to pay attention , Mark, there are no unimportant details.
> "Attention", the bird says..
>
>
>
>