[MD] BioCentrism: Was Zeno correct?

[118]

Hi Adrie

On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 12:38 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Well, in the physikal world,motion is always relative,there are no other
> motions
> so if and when you try to shelter motion under the ubrella of Quality,
> quality
> itself will inherit the relative properties of motion , being restricted to
> the relativityness of movement, you can only define motion in the
> metaphysikal
> world as undefinable, to avoid the inheritance effect towards relativity.
>
> Quality cannot be relative, it has no boundary's or restrictions.
>
>
> To move up to some good stuff
>

[Mark]
Yes, thanks Adrie, I am getting tired of Zeno as I am sure you are.
 Contemplating a motion towards betterness has given me a headache.

>
> ZAm, Page 166/167
> e-copy, ..
>
>
> "At the leading edge there are no subjects, no objects, only the track of
> Quality ahead, and if you have no formal way of evaluating, no way of
> acknowledging this Quality, then the entire train has no way of knowing
> where to go. You don’t have pure reason...you have pure confusion. The
> leading edge is where absolutely all the action is. The leading edge
> contains all the infinite
> possibilities of the future. It contains all the history of the past. Where
> else could they be contained?
> The past cannot remember the past. The future can’t generate the future.
> The
> cutting edge of this instant right here and now is always nothing less than
> the totality of everything there is.
> Value, the leading edge of reality, is no longer an irrelevant offshoot of
> structure. Value is the predecessor of structure. It’s the preintellectual
> awareness that gives rise to it. Our structured reality is preselected on
> the basis of value, and really to understand structured reality requires an
> understanding of the value source from which it’s derived.
> One’s rational understanding of a motorcycle is therefore modified from
> minute to minute as one works on it and sees that a new and different
> rational understanding has more Quality. One doesn’t cling to old sticky
> ideas because one has an immediate rational basis for rejecting them.
> Reality isn’t static anymore. It’s not a set of ideas you have to either
> fight or resign yourself to. It’s made up, in part, of ideas that are
> expected to grow as you grow, and as we all grow, century after century.
> With Quality as a central undefined term, reality is, in its essential
> nature, not static but dynamic. And when you really understand dynamic
> reality you never get stuck. It has forms but the forms are capable of
> change.
> To put it in more concrete terms: If you want to build a factory, or fix a
> motorcycle, or set a nation right without getting stuck, then classical,
> structured, dualistic subject-object knowledge, although necessary, isn’t
> enough. You have to have some feeling for the quality of the work. You have
> to have a sense of what’s good. That is what carries you forward. This
> sense
> isn’t just something you’re born with, although you are born with it. It’s
> also something you can develop. It’s not just "intuition," not just
> unexplainable "skill" or "talent." It’s the direct result of contact with
> basic reality, Quality, which dualistic reason has in the past tended to
> conceal." end (""""mine)
>

[Mark]
Yes, I remember this passage well.  It is indeed a move towards Zen.  I have
also discussed this.  Another technique is through beginner's mind, a book
by D.T. Suzuki on Zen.  I sometimes use the analogy of a comet.  There is a
lot of debri left in the comet's tail.  This is akin to memory.  It is quite
possible to live for long periods of time in the debri of memory.  It is yet
another to live at the leading edge of the comet.  Direct contact with full
Quality happens here, before it is reflected on.  Once reflected, it becomes
incorporated into memory and becomes debri which can be manipulated.  It is
also important to remember, however, that memory recall only exists in the
present.  As such, manipulation of concepts using memory is also a form of
Quality, just not the immediate full kind.  It is more like a cow
ruminating.


>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
> (Adrie)
>
> some isolated parts from this, pay attention to the "here and now"
>
> The past cannot remember the past. The future can’t generate the future.
>
> The cutting edge of this instant right here and now is always nothing less
> than the totality of everything there is.
>
>
> Value, the leading edge of reality, is no longer an irrelevant offshoot of
> structure. Value is the predecessor of structure. It’s the preintellectual
> awareness that gives rise to it. Our structured reality is preselected on
> the basis of value, and really to understand structured reality requires an
> understanding of the value source from which it’s derived.
>

[Mark]
Yes, I agree.  This is what I am trying to relay through my analogy of
quality being in between, not so much in spacial  coordinates, but in
conceptual ones.  Quality does create structure in this way.  Understanding
the value source seems to be MOQ, which is what we are all trying to do.
 Thanks for the input.

Cheers,
Mark

>
>
>
> 2010/11/8 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com>
>
> > Hi Adrie,
> >
> > I am sorry, I am a bit slow.  I do understand physical reality, and that
> > things seem to move within it.  How does this facet tie in with MOQ?   I
> am
> > interested; I want to learn.  This is not an attempt at dismissive
> > arguments
> > that you seem to love.  It is an honest question which digs into the
> > metaphysics of Quality.  Please explain.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mark
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 5:58 AM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > motion is a facet of the physikal reality
> > >
> > > 2010/11/7 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com>
> > >
> > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > parser
> > > 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
> > >
> > 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> parser
> 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
>