[MD] humpty dumpty

[118]

Hi Marsha,
Thank you for the suggestion.  I suppose I could return to that view,
but I have moved on.  I am more comfortable where I am now, which is
Quality.  But, that is just me and my little oasis.

I am glad that you find where you are to be meaningful, for that is
what we create.  If this is in the form of a multiple choice answer,
then stick with it.  We keep evolving with every day.  Consider the
lily.

Regards,
Mark

On 8/4/12, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
> Mark,
>
> A great mysterious guru already informed me the answer is yes, no and all of
> the above, you might consider it such.
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
> On Aug 5, 2012, at 12:21 AM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Marsha,
>> I understand.  Must be difficult sometimes.  But I don't blame you, it is
>> a simple matter of how one uses this forum.  Feel free to ask me any
>> question, I will do my ignorant best to answer you.  I know next to
>> nothing.
>>
>> When one realizes that "analogy all the way down" has no real placement,
>> one becomes aware of what it imparts.  It reveals the exact opposite of
>> such a statement.  Give it a think, I am not attacking you.
>>
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> On Aug 4, 2012, at 4:07 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Mark,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 4, 2012, at 2:59 PM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 6:20 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Mark asked:
>>>>>>> Why does Pirsig think it is important to bring in a social level when
>>>>>>> creating a metaphysics based on Quality? Is there an alternative
>>>>>>> approach that would deliver the same message about Quality?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> dmb says:
>>>>>>> The MOQ's social level is one of four different kinds of STATIC
>>>>>>> quality and all four levels are to be distinguished from Quality or
>>>>>>> Dynamic Quality. There are important reasons for distinguishing the
>>>>>>> social level from the other levels of static quality, but DQ is not
>>>>>>> relevant to those reasons. For this reason, your question doesn't
>>>>>>> make any sense.
>>>>
>>>> Mark:
>>>> I hope my question makes sense now to dmb, now that I have followed it
>>>> up with clarification.  I am still waiting for a response, unless dmb
>>>> does not want to philosophize.  I can accept that.
>>>>
>>>>> Marsha
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> p.s.  There is lots more to present about Schopenhauer's ideas about
>>>>> perceptions and concepts.   (All very interesting, even if only
>>>>> analogy...)
>>>>
>>>> Marsha, I do not understand what you are saying here, since you left
>>>> it with "..."
>>>
>>> Sorry, it would have made more sense if I had written the last sentence
>>> in parentheses, as an aside - (All very interesting, even if only
>>> analogy...).
>>>
>>> I will not continue with your questions because I do not want to confuse
>>> and conflate any of Schopenhauer's philosophic definitions with your
>>> questioning my statement concerning 'analogy'.
>>>
>>> I will say only that I meant that it is ALL 'analogy all the way down'
>>> and out, if you like.  Yes, it is probably an overused aphorism, but I
>>> still think it has value.
>>>
>>>
>>> Marsha
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I will explain my confusion starting with a commonplace definition
>>>> (from the top of a google search "definition of analogy"):
>>>>
>>>> a·nal·o·gy/əˈnaləjē/
>>>> Noun:
>>>> 1. A comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their
>>>> structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification.
>>>> 2. A correspondence or partial similarity.
>>>>
>>>> Mark once again:
>>>> What is Schopenhauer presenting an analogy OF?  Analogies are
>>>> representations of something.  Are you saying that what he presents is
>>>> an analogy of Quality?  And don't tell me that Quality itself is an
>>>> analogy, that is not what I am asking.  From your readings of
>>>> Schopenhauer, what is the analogy?  What is he trying to clarify?
>>>> What are his writings a correspondence to?  How do these relate to
>>>> MoQ?  Please don't hide like dmb does.  This could be a good
>>>> discussion.  I might learn something.
>>>>
>>>> "Analogies all the way down" is a silly paradox, but it can lead to
>>>> awareness of Quality.  Such a statement is not an answer, but a
>>>> suggestion.  What does it suggest to you?
>>>>
>>>> To say something is analogy requires a completion of such a statement.
>>>> Otherwise it is similar to a statement like...
>>>>
>>>> Hope you understand my confusion.
>>>>
>>>> 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
>> 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
> 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
>