[MD] Awareness and consciousness in the MOQ

[X Acto]

David to Andre:
Is a 'referring term' not a definition? I think to some degree that it is..

Andre:
Well, I beg to differ David. I do not think that by referring to [DQ] you in any way,shape or form are already defining it.Rather the referral is made from that which it is not. The referring is a finger pointing to... .

Ron:
That is the way I tend to view it Andre. I had caught some flak in the past for referring to it as the "Good"
as such in broad general meaning to refer to the undefined Good. I had connected these terms in the past
with natural selection to draw together the evolutionary aspect. Now, by no means are the connections
of these ideas a certain defining of DQ but they do serve as a finger pointing, a reference.
I think an artful blend of what it is and also what it is not would evoke a greater intelligibility on the matter.
The fear of definition in that it is so great that it prevents any description often inhibits any greater
understanding of what we mean by the term as subscribers to RMP's MoQ. 
DQ has been discussed as both a placeholder for the now of experience and also as the base general concept
of the undefined Good. That being said, the more one says about the undefined Good, the farther one gets
from it, but, the more one says about it can also bring others closer to that Dynamic undefined experience
and render that experience with a greater understanding.
 
..