[MD] seeing

[118]

Hi Ron,

In my understanding, "not this, not that" is a phrase to suggest to
the listener to stop thinking in terms of static quality.  That is
all.  It does not actually define anything except maybe an attitude.
As soon as one says "it IS 'not this, not that'", the whole phrase
becomes meaningless.  It is ALSO NOT "not this, not that".  Which
means it is "everything and nothing".  Or, we could say that Quality
is the knowable AND the unknowable (and of course the unfathomable).
As soon as we put NOT into the equation, we diminish Quality into a
subcategory below Truth.  Then we are right back to where we started
before Pirsig came around.

By subjecting Quality to modal logic, it buries it into the archives
of philosophy as another "cute idea".  This is why Pirsig said it was
indefinable.  He then goes on to write a book defining it, but that
was a book of rhetoric, not of truths.  Quality does not HAVE to exist
in four levels.  Quality does not HAVE to be divided into DQ and sq.
However, the way metaphysics works, creating these things may provide
us with satisfactory answers to a variety of other questions.  This is
no different from creating all these artificial concepts such as speed
and mass as they do in physics.  We create a framework, and then see
how useful it is.  The Quality is in the pudding.


Cheers,
Mark

Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 5:32 AM, X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com> wrote:
>
> To all,
>
> Hagan:
>
>   "Consciousness is nothing more than the splitting of Reality into this and that.  "
>
> Marsha:
> Not this, not that...
>
> Ron:
> This concludes then that "UN-consciouness" is what all life is striving towards if
> "Not this, not that" accurately describes the nature of DQ in the most general terms.
>
> Which seems to conflict with the idea that intellectual quality is the most moral form
> of Quality.
>
> Also it seems to conflict with the idea that DQ is "everchanging" for change is making
> the conscious splitting from past to present into "this and that".
>
> Therefore I have my doubts as to the effective use of the term "not this, not that" as the best
> general understanding of DQ.
>
>
> ...
> 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
>