[MD] Awareness and consciousness in the MOQ

Andre andrebroersen at gmail.com
Sat Apr 7 09:26:32 PDT 2012


David to Andre:
I'm confused by this comment because you end up agreeing with me below 
that even the word 'quality' is a definition of some kind?

Andre:
No intention of confusing you David. Phaedrus sees in the use of the 
term "Quality" already a 'violation' of the mystical 'nothingness'. I 
think it is also a compromise in terms of trying to develop a 
philosophical framework that seeks to incorporate Eastern as well as 
Western traditions, perhaps as a result of Pirsig's reading of 
Northrop's "Meeting of East and West".

I think Phaedrus says somewhere in LILA that with a term like 
'nothingness' you won't even get a hearing in the Western 
philosophical/scientific community. You won't get taken seriously. But 
they cannot get around a term such as Quality or value for that matter.
"With the identification of static and Dynamic Quality as the 
fundamental division of the world, Phaedrus felt that some kind of goal 
had been reached. The first division of the Metaphysics of Quality now 
covered the spectrum of experience from primitive mysticism to quantum 
mechanics.(LILA, p 124)

David:
Us talking right now is us defining Dynamic Quality.

Andre:
Sorry mate, but I stick to ma guns. O:-) Talking is not(necessarily) 
defining. And please keep in mind Anthony's suggestion...you have read 
ZMM and LILA, no? So what is the 'definition' of Quality?

David:
Words are ruining the ultimately undefined nature of reality.

Andre:
Not sure if you read my post to Ron, but I do not think that words 'are 
ruining the ultimately undefined nature of reality'. The Buddha rests 
just as comfortably in the gears of a motorcycle as in the words of a 
text. I prefer the use of the term 'partial'. I mean, if words are 
ruining everything then we may as well stop talking altogether, in the 
same way that if certain posters consider sq to be an illusion then we 
may as well stop living. I mean it just nullifies everything. As if, 
indeed everything in the universe can be described by the twenty-six 
written characters. Not on.



More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list