[MD] Able to change well.

[MarshaV]

On Sep 4, 2010, at 3:52 PM, schoadabyool at talktalk.net wrote:

> 
> 
>> Ade,
>> 
>> Within the MoQ all that we 'know' is static patterns.  Whether 
>> Jung's archetypes, or Einstein's special relativity, it is static 
>> pattern(s) of value.
>> 
>> Marsha 
>> 
>> Hello Marsha,
>> the structure of the unconscious is unknown.
>> When the author of the moq says that its [moq] terms are arrived at 
> dynamically, it is similar to saying moq terms are of the subconscious.
>> Thank you
> 
> 
> Ade,
> 
> Are you saying:  Static patterns of value as terms are below conscious???  
> 
> 
> Marsha
> 
> 
> Hello Marsha,
> I'm suggesting all symbols emerge from the collective unconscious.
> So those of the moq must also emerge from the collective unconscious.
> Moq symbols currently have the names static and dynamic, but the symbols
> themselves are Archetypal, of the collective, and perhaps deeper and
> transcendental.
> By transcendental i mean outside space and time.
> If i understand correctly.
> Anyone who believes transcendental harmony is in the same area it seems to me.
> 
> 
> Let's go further, this is all Neoplatonism.
> The quantum physicist David Bohm speaks of Implicate order to explain the
> more paradoxic formulations of quantum dynamics.
> I think this is Neoplatonism too by the looks of it.
> Have i cleared that up or made things worse?
> Thank you
> Ade



Ade,

I might agree that bits and pieces of patterns are held within an individual's 
memory, and this memory (bits and pieces of pattern) are held collectively 
across many individuals as collective memory constituting a more static se of 
pattern.  To me it seems that most static patterns of value are held below 
consciousness.  Some social patterns and most intellectual patterns are within 
conscious awareness.  But this is all speculations for the purpose of comparing 
Jung's point-of-view within a Metaphysics of Quality.  

Within the MoQ there is also the classification of the different types of patterns 
into a hierarchical, evolutionary structure moving towards a more dynamic state 
which represent betterment: inorganic, biological, social and intellectual.   My 
memory of Jung is quite stale.  I've more recently read and viewed much dialogue 
between David Bohm and Krishnamurti, and some of this discussion supports the 
MoQ's position, and some of it doesn't.  I think Krishnamurti has said that all thinking 
is the source of self (knower) and objects (known) and is at fault in creating 
a false duality.  

I experience/understand the MoQ to most basically to represent Reality is
Quality(unpatterned experience/patterned experience).  

If it is helpful to you for now to make connections between Jung and Pirsig, I say 
go for it.  The idea is never just to believe what is being suggested, but to examine 
it deeply and find out for yourself.

Now I can only hope I have not made matters worse. 


Marsha
 
 
 
___