[MD] humpty dumpty

[118]

Hi Jan Anders,
I really do not find anything of substance in your post to me.  I
expected more from you.  I thought this was a forum to discuss MoQ,
not to say that a book had been written on such.  If you have an
opinion on the reason behind the structure which Pirsig creates then
by all means present it.  Otherwise sit on the sidelines and learn.

That you would consider Zoroastrian dualism as a model for
presentation is up to you.  I do not think you have any idea of what
you write there.  I prefer the William Blake approach of merging the
duality.  You also probably have no idea what I am speaking of there
either.  So please do not pretend to be erudite in these matters.
Stick to your novels which simply retell a story.

I have the MoQ to live by.  It is not the fancy metaphysics that you
prefer to expound on.  Quality is a manner of interpretation.  It is
that by which one reconciles one’s existence.  It creates a personal
relationship with what is, and is therefore the creation of meaning.
There is no distance here, in fact "distance" is not even an
appropriate word to use.  I thought you had perhaps come some way by
writing a book on the subject, but you seem to be going over the same
old ground (and what have you found?).  Like I said, stick to your
fictional novels and leave the philosophizing up to others.

As you should know, the levels are trivial when it comes to Quality; I
am not asking for a replacement.  They are a form of explanation for
something that needs no explanation.  My question (now to you) is what
is it about the levels that help you construct a sense of Quality of
the world?  If you choose simply to say "it is written", then you can
join the rest of those that proselytize on the “good book”.  As it is,
you are providing nothing of substance to the discussion.  This is a
forum for philosophy not for simplistic homilies.  You should know
better; get serious.  Perhaps writing in your native tongue would
help.  I can try to translate it.

Regards,
Mark

On 8/8/12, Jan Anders Andersson <jananderses at telia.com> wrote:
> Hi Mark
>
> You are really openminded and seem to have a certain distance to the MOQ.
>
> Of course you are free to make up just any differentiation of the patterns
> on oyur own; Good/Evil, Father God/ Mother Earth, Father Dynamic/Mother
> Static, White/Grey, shades of/Black, Romantic/Classic, Man/Woman,
> East/West/Russia/Africa/Baltimore and so on.
>
> I think that RMP had a good reason to do the split into the four levels;
> physical, biological, social and intellectual. I think it is quite well
> described in LILA ch 24.
> The four levels is further emphasized in my book as you might have seen by
> now.
> The four levels were very practical for messing up the situation for a
> couple like John and Elsa. It was so fun to write "Money and the Art...".
>
> If you want to replace RMPs levels with something else I would like to see
> some practical REASON why yours should be better than his.
>
> jan ANders

> 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
>