[MD] Quality and the Higgs Field: An Analogy

[118]

Hi Andre,

Well, with your post that I deleted much of, you reveal your ignorance
concerning Quality.  This not only shows in your emotional rebuttal of
Ham with, (what now is becoming classic ignorant babble in this
forum), a nonsensical pecking order-like trivial attack.  Your
statements add nothing to the progress of MoQ and perhaps are somewhat
a left over from a dream you had on the subject many years ago.  I
would have to ask you, if you know it all, then what are you doing
here?  Please, if you are part of some old guard of MoQ, then you have
yet to step into what is happening.  You are past-tense.

Ham has provided input which has enabled greater progress in MoQ than
any that has been posted in the last three years.  Perhaps you should
continue to debate the connections of Pirsig to other twentieth
century philosophers who have succumbed to the notion of absolute
truth.  If you really know what Quality is, then say so.  Don't fall
to the level of ignorant criticism of something that you know nothing
about.  Your fundamental MoQ stuff is either outdated, or some
religion of yours.

Now, you make the very intellectual statement that Quality "simply
is".  Well, that is indeed enlightening for this forum.  I could state
with equal certainly that "Quality is not".  So, please spare us the
kindergarten Buddhism, we are in a philosophy forum.  In terms of your
claim that Quality does not act on anything.  You will notice that my
statement was that Nature is Quality in action.  The analogy would be
one of a boat which leaves Nature in its wake.  Choices are impacted
by Quality, if such a thing is not action, then that is only because
it is passive.  Quality "simply is" indeed!  Then why try to bring in
levels and such, why try to divine direction?  Well, the purpose is to
bring about understanding of the subject of Quality, which is done in
this forum through rational discussion.  Everything "simply is", and
then we create structure around it so that meaning can be imparted.
Let me know what your definition of the word "is" is.

>
> Andre:
> Mark and John can get themselves into their own entanglements. Quality does
> not 'act', it simply is, and 'the universe' does not produce anything. For
> goodness sake! This is fundamental MOQ stuff.

[Mark]
Well, it has produced a lot of fun for me.  Oh, I forgot, that is not
produced in the real sense, as in produce a pile of dung.
>
>>
> Andre:
> I am ignoring the earlier part of your post which leads you to this part
> Ham. Asking for a 'source of Quality' is a true indication you have no idea
> of the MOQ. What are you doing here?

[Mark]
Well indeed Andre, now that was illuminating.  The truth is, that you
have no idea of the MoQ, None.  I would be happy if you could show me
some indication to the contrary.  How about a paragraph on what MoQ
really is?  Sure, I dare you.  I won't hold my breath.

> Andre:
> Well, here you have it Ham. Without a 'God' you are very alone, all by you
> iddy biddy self. You ask for the 'metaphysical source'? Keep on looking my
> man. It seems that your essence does not provide one either or are you
> suggesting that your essence idea is better that Pirsig's Quality idea?

[Mark]
Well Andre, your insight from this paragraph is indeed grand.  I have
no idea what you have found, but please do not try to give it to me.
Your illusionary sense of grandeur makes you the king of crap city,
population one.  Are you suggesting that you are a disciple of
Pirsig's.  Is Ham professing blasphemy against your God?  Are you
suggesting that in all your wisdom, you know what is better and that
we all need to follow you?  Please.
>
[Andre]
> I know we have asked and told you before but I would urge you to purchase
> Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, read it and then purchase and
> read LILA. The more I read your posts the more I am convinced you have done
> neither...despite your claims to the contrary.

[Mark]
Well, Andre, I would suggest that you read Finnegans Wake , the Cat in
the Hat, Alice in Wonderland, and something by Sidney Sheldon.  That
should keep you busy.  Let me know when you are done, and I have
another list.  Oh, and by the way, if you want to quote something out
of Lila just to show how truthful you are, you are on the wrong path.
If you support your truth with an imaginary truth, you are left on
shifting sands.  There is no Quality there, or in your recent post.
>
Cheers,
Mark
>
>
> 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
>