[MD] humpty dumpty

[118]

Hi Jan Anders,
I enjoyed what you wrote below.  Morality is all about choice.  A
moral universe is one that has choice.  A determined universe is
amoral.  The difference between good and evil is dependent on how
judgment is illuminated on them.  This is the choice which is
presented.

I remember your three independent forms of reality from before and
thought they were well presented even back then.  Of course we have to
start by assuming that some things are real otherwise there is nothing
to talk about.  The usefulness of such assumptions is the test.

I don't know if this fits in with your exposition, but I also see
money as an "interactive" property of existence.  As I have said in
the past, I like to divide Quality up into SQ, DQ, and IQ (interactive
quality).  Money replaced the bartering system and allowed for a more
streamlined mode for people to exchange their labors.  It allowed for
specialization since currency was universally accepted.  In this way,
money can be considered as a means of communication, just like
writing.  In standard economics, the faster that money is exchanged
the more fruitful an economy.  The same can be said for discussion and
its effect on society.  It is my hope that a free internet will prove
to be the next lubricant which will break the chains of current
humanity.

In terms of time, I found that once I adopted a perception based on
Quality, I suddenly had loads of free time.  It was as if a lot of
baggage had been removed from my mind.  I spend less time doing those
necessary chores and more time enjoying myself.  There seems to be so
much unnecessary chatter going on in today's world that all the time
is used up.  A Quality approach rectified this for me.  There are only
a few things that are truly worth one's time.  I suppose this is a
form of time saving.

Cheers,
Mark

On 8/9/12, Jan Anders Andersson <jananderses at telia.com> wrote:
> Hi Mark
>
> Thanks for your exhaustive answer. It makes my understanding of your efforts
> more complete. After finishing reading my book you will maybe understand my
> viewpoint too.
>
> I agree that moral is much about goodness and evilness, words that aren't
> very helpful in real life.
> I found that goodness is the balance in three independent dimensions of
> reality; mass, form and value. Saved time is the key to it all because
> balancing just any process in these three aspects is what makes it most
> time-effective. We can call it the Small Bang theory. Unbalance is evil, but
> sometime quite comic or dramatic.
>
> Existence is undeniable because existence is needed to be able to doubt its
> existence. Descartes.
>
> Time is real, everything is under change, ask Marsha.
>
> Time has a direction, energy is under change but always the same total
> amount, ask thermodynamics.
>
> Time is NOT money, money is SAVED time. Business and marketing is all about
> saving time for your customers. Marketing is the art of convincing the
> customers that there are more values in the good or the service than he pays
> for it. Values that are so important for global business but never comes
> into the accountance books. Milton Friedman and the Chicago boys never
> understood that and that is why World Economy of today is so fucked up and
> destroying so much of our environment and living matter. Values that are not
> precised in the books and figures can't just can be taken seriously by the
> members of the board. Their purpose is to catch and collect numbers, not
> values. Life is priceless and by that worthless. If this is going to
> continue the human civilization will fall. Those who read the money part of
> my book will better understand how to make better business just by
> understanding where to find and value the real markets. Presidents will be
> able to make better decisions, housewifes will plan their shopping rounds
> better. Bums will have a chance to rise up again. Fundamentalism and
> prudeness will understand and practice the Art of Losing Control.
>
> Anything that makes things go easier is considered to be better, it is more
> practical. Going easier means that it takes less time to do it. That is the
> pragmatic truth, as long as no one have a better solution we stick to the
> periodic table.
>
> The trick is that the saved time at all levels, the inorganic, the organic,
> the social and the intellectual, has to be used again on something. Light
> emittance, mutations, music and politics is all expressions of the use of
> saved time. It is definitely NOT a waste of time even if there are some
> frictional losses. Bad TV-shows are definitely a waste of time, isn't it?
>
> The main issue for me today is to make people understand the value of this.
> The value of knowing how to save and use time, the value of our own
> emotional system, how it is responding to Quality in all aspects in a better
> life. From specs to sex. I wrote a weird road story to frame it into.
> Anything you read and hear today in media about human life on earth tells
> the same story but without any clue how to do it better.
>
> Take it easy and have a good time Mark
>
> Jan Anders
>
>
> 9 aug 2012 kl. 19:15 skrev 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi Jan Anders,
>> Thank you for the condolences.  I am not sure if I have used up my
>> post allotment for the day, but here goes.
>>
>> At the expense of providing an opinion which has already been much
>> discussed, I can say something about the "morality aspect" of Lila,
>> which as you say is an inquiry meant to give us something to think
>> about.  It is not necessarily intended to give us answers.
>>
>> What Pirsig seeks to impart is a projection of what we humans term
>> morality into the universe at large.  As I have suggested in the past,
>> what we have is the human version of morality.  This is an expression
>> of ours, but can also be considered as an expression of the universe.
>> What is required to take this leap is to consider aspects of morality
>> and try to extrapolate them to everything.
>>
>> Morality colors free will.  So to begin, one must ascribe free will to
>> the universe at large, which Pirsig does.  I agree with this.  Photons
>> are making choices as they cross the universe.  These photons do not
>> experience time (as we do) so the choices are of a different nature.
>> That it would seem determined is simply because these photons are
>> making the "best choices" and seemingly always do the same thing.
>>
>> Morality is about good and evil.  This is a standard Zoroastrian
>> dichotomy which is used as analogy for existence.  What is missing in
>> this form of presentation is the interaction between good and evil
>> (thus forming a triad of "powers").  For logical reasons this
>> “interactive property” must exist separately from Good and Evil for it
>> to transform either one.  Morality comes into play in such
>> interaction.
>>
>> The arrow of Quality is biased.  Therefore, there is a skewing towards
>> "good" as opposed to evil.  This is no different from the notion that
>> when the universe "banged", there was a slight bias towards our form
>> of matter as opposed to "anti-matter".  One could say that MoQ is a
>> positive manner by which to interpret existence.  The trick is, of
>> course, leaving the human form of morality and traveling to that which
>> gives our morality its substance.  An analogy would be the different
>> forms that water takes depending on its container.  It may appear
>> different in a glass than a lake (or snowflake), but it is all water
>> from the same source.
>>
>> As an inquiry into morals, Pirsig attempts to imbue one's awareness
>> with the Quality that he feels.  That is, the static world of
>> appearances is governed by more than just the material.  It is
>> governed by free will and choice.  By elevating the rest of existence
>> to our human level, the universe takes on a different color.  What can
>> result from this point of view is an increase in compassion, just like
>> that which results from Buddhist doctrine and practice.
>>
>> In terms of the periodic table:
>>
>> The term illusion is used in different ways.  So, I am hard pressed to
>> answer your question.
>>
>> With science we group things in useful ways.  Such grouping is a
>> creative process.   When we create constellations of the stars, we
>> could say that such constellations are illusions, but I don't think
>> that would be the proper word for them.  I would call them useful
>> constructs.  The same goes for the periodic table.  Using the periodic
>> table creates more meaning (at least for the chemist), and is useful
>> in the transformation of matter (Alchemy in its physical embodiment).
>> It should always be stressed that all science is provisional.  The
>> periodic table seems to work well right now, but there is no reason to
>> doubt that a better manner of interpretation will come along.
>>
>> The direction of Quality presupposes a tendency toward “betterness”,
>> whatever that may mean to you.  Betterness is a moral choice.  By
>> interpreting this grouping as a moral process, we imbue such elements
>> with a ranking equal to our own.  From this comes a sense of
>> “partnership” rather than domination; of belonging rather than
>> alienation.  Quality is a manner of relating to the world at large.
>>
>> Hope this answers your question.
>>
>> 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
>