[MD] [Bulk] Re: Emptiness & Quantum Mechancics

[MarshaV]

The Metaphysics of Quality is not intended to be within any philosophic tradition, although obviously it was not written in a vacuum.  My first awareness that it resembled James' work came from a magazine review long after “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance” was published. The Metaphysics of Quality's central idea that the world is nothing but value is not part of any philosophic tradition that I know of. I have proposed it because it seems to me that when you look into it carefully it makes more sense than all the other things the world is supposed to be composed of. One particular strength lies in its applicability to quantum physics, where substance has been dismissed but nothing except arcane mathematical formulae has really replaced it. 

During the writing of the MOQ a long search was made through an encyclopedia of philosophy to see if the MOQ was repeating what someone else had said. And this was so stated in “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance”. None of the traditional European philosophers seemed to match in any close way. The closest finds were Plotinus, Lao Tsu, and Professor F.S.C. Northrop of Yale University.  These similarities have been acknowledged many times.

	(RMP, A brief summary of the Metaphysics of Quality, October 2005)

 




On Oct 10, 2010, at 11:25 AM, Andre Broersen wrote:

> Marsha to Andre:
> 
> Marsha previously:
> 
> My primary mission is not to support  'contemporary pragmatism'.
> 
> Marsha now:
> I support being pragmatic.
> 
> But that doesn't mean I am going to adopt dmb's notion of Contemporary Pragmatism.
> 
> Andre:
> You are beginning to adopt Bodvar's method of extricating yourself from an untenable position
> whereby you lose a sense of what you are talking about, the implications of what you are talking
> about, and the direction that it takes you. You begin to invent things, twist things, bend things
> etc, to try to get yourself out of admitting you are lost.
> Before long you'll have invented six different streams of pragmatism as decoys.
> 
> Dmb is talking about pragmatism plain and simple, William James's pragmatism the one the MOQ subscribes to
> and indeed has improved upon.
> 
> The reason why I did not copy the 2.7 section for all to see is because I have to do it by hand, and it is a
> little lengthy and, I know that in response I get a one-line dismissal.
> 
> Let's just say that Bodvar has his MOQ and that we now have Marsha's pragmatism.
> 
> Marsha:
> I have repeatedly stated I am study the MoQ as a bridge between East and West.
> 
> Andre:
> Yes you have. And very recently you said you try to do this from a Buddhist perspective and a little
> while ago you stated that you are not a Buddhist nor an expert in it.
> 
> Have you actually read Northrop's 'The Meeting of East and West'? It is the book young Phaedrus read on
> the ship taking him back to America after his stint in Korea. It is referred to in ZMM.
> Mr. Pirsig calls himself a student of Northrop. It may be a good idea to start there to give yourself
> an overall context within which to place the(scholarly side)of the MOQ.
> 
> 
> 
> 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


 
___