[MD] Taking Words Seriously

[Joseph Maurer]

Hi Matt and All,

Imho Part of the problem in communicating ideas is that words are being
redefined.  Quality moves from an adjective to a noun.  Good also is
conceptualized in both categories.  To aid communication, a vocabulary has
to be established of SOM and MOQ.  Is the definition or description for
"evolution" to be or not to be?

The biggest stumbling block to that vocabulary is evolution!  "Indeterminacy
of DQ/degeneracy" undercuts "just knowing it."

For myself "evolutionary markers", "definitions" are all in the unknown,
discussed bin.  I suggest that "evolutionary markers" follow a pattern like
the musical octave of 7 steps of varying levels as a template.  At least
sound and color define some definitive repeating differences.

Joe  


On 10/6/11 11:45 AM, "Matt Kundert" <pirsigaffliction at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Matt:
> But are we not sometimes wrong about what we feel is going on in
> our experience?  Your answer is, roughly, that we "just know" when
> we are following DQ.  But the reason I've been bringing the thesis
> I've dubbed the "indeterminacy of DQ/degeneracy" to bear on this
> issue is because it seems to me that that idea in Pirsig undercuts
> the certainty otherwise endowed to "just knowing it."