[MD] The Dynamics of Value

[ADRIE KINTZIGER]

Nope, the originating source is not there anymore,it left , along with
history.

2010/10/27 Ham Priday <hampday1 at verizon.net>

>
> On Oct. 26 at 10:30 AM, Andre asked Alex:
>
>
>
>  Can you tell me /A what lies 'outside' the MOQ?  What do you mean
>> when you and Ham 'consider the MOQ in a wider context'? What 'reality' are
>> you referring to that lies outside of experience? Is there something you are
>> referring to that lies outside of cosmological
>> evolution?  If so, I am very interested to hear.
>>
>
> Even "cosmological evolution" is subject to the ex nililo principle, Andre.
> It doesn't arise from nothing.
> Prsig has presented us with an ontology of Quality grounded in experience.
> The MoQ is a paradigm for the experiential world of existence, not
> metaphysical reality.  Even though it doesn't acknowledge subjects and
> objects as anything but "patterns of Quality", the existence of Quality (or
> Value) itself requires the realization of an observer.  And that presupposes
> a primary source that transcends both objective otherness and
> value-sensibility.
>
>
>  Have you achieved a way of arriving at 'concepts' without experience? Have
>> you arrived at concepts that have no value? Do you have any examples
>> you'd like to share with us?
>>
>
> Metaphysical concepts are "intuitive" inights formulated logically, hence
> do not require experience or empirical knowledge.  If a concept has no value
> it is not worth positing.  A cosmology that neglects the source of value is
> incomplete, in my opinion.  Essentialism posits Absolute Essence as the
> metaphysical source of all value.  But neither Value nor the Sensibility
> which realizes it is differentiated in Essence.
>
>
>  It seems to me that when you say 'MOQ just considers experience', with
>> your use of the term 'just' you are wiping out Pirsig's intention and
>> achievement and completely misunderstand the MOQ.  I really wonder
>> what you are looking for here on this discuss.
>>
>
> When Pirsig says "experience is the cutting edge of reality" and DQ is its
> source, he is effectively limiting his thesis to experiential (i.e.,
> existential) reality.  Adding the terms "static" and "dynamic" to acommodate
> "patterns" and "levels", respectively, is an artificial construct intended
> to replace a transcendent creator or source.  But there is no logical or
> metaphysical justification for this terminology, nor does it produce two
> kinds of Quality.  An absolute source avoids the need for such conceptual
> bifurcation.  All value is realized relationally (existentially); but its
> ultimate source is the Oneness of Essence.
>
> Until you see the value of an absolute ontology, you are stuck with
> empirical formulations that apply only to the relations and dynamics of
> finite phenomena.  In other words, you remain an objectivist in a world of
> appearances that has no originating source.
>
> Essentially speaking,
> Ham
>
>
> 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