[MD] absolute Quality

[118]

Hi Marsha,
Thank you for your post.

Sent laboriously from an iPhone,
Mark

On Jan 13, 2012, at 3:51 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

> 
> Mark, 
> 
> 
> Marsha:
> I think of Anthony's statement "Quality is seen as absolute" as pointing to Dynamic Quality, or Buddhist's Ultimate Truth.  As such, he is indicating what is indeterminate, or not further analyzable, and, therefore, what exists in an ultimate sense.  It is beyond what can be conceptualized, what is beyond the conceptual horizon.  I believe that was what was meant by using the word "absolute".  But I could be wrong.  

I do not think you are wrong, and indeed it is difficult to place Absolute truth within the conventional framework of "truth".  It is perhaps a misnomer of Truth.  We could call Absolute truth as "that which is".  Of course there are logical problems with that.  A metaphysics is a presentation of "the nature of what is", and must therefore subscribe to the absolute.  I do not have a problem with conventional or common or provisional truth.  However, when we try to construct a metaphysics on relative truth it falls apart.
> 
> Static patterns, or provisional truths, represent what is analyzable and, therefore, what exists in a relative or conventional sense.  It is the result of mental interpretation. It is always understood as an object of conceptual thought.  

When static pattern are subscribed to for Explanation you are using an absolute sense, otherwise your term patterns becomes relative to another way of viewing Quality, and leaves one swimming in a metaphysics without meaning (IMO).
> 
> Dynamic Quality is unknowable, undividable and undefinable.  Personally, I do not think it appropriate to mix the two types of truths (static and Dynamic) in the same explanation.  It gets too confusing, so I have nothing to say about Dynamic Quality.  
> 
I believe what you are saying is that DQ cannot be reduced to intellectual understanding, but, certainly we can know DQ since it comprises the fabric from which we are made.  The intellect is only part of such knowing, and as such represents a constellation.

There is plenty to say about DQ so long as it is seen as a finger pointing, but I know what you mean, it can be confusing to try to encapsulate it with logic.  This is the problem Pirsig faces, since metaphysics is a logical discipline.  Therefore he cautions by using "undefinable", so the readers do not confuse what he says with what he is pointing at (again IMO, of course everything I present is opinion).

To arrive at a metaphysical truth (absolute depiction) one must use accepted truths otherwise the audience is lost.  Perhaps the static is a tool of the dynamic.  That would be that DQ uses sq to bring forth DQ.  In the same way sq uses DQ to bring forth sq.  it is this interplay that I am currently contemplating with "right view".

By the way, when Anthony speaks of MoQ using pragmatic truth, is this statement a pragmatic truth on its own?  This is not a question for you, I am just wondering how Anthony arrives at this conclusion.  I have not read his thesis yet since I have not had to use it in a post.

Cheers,
Mark
> 
> 
> Marsha 
> 
> 
> 
> ---  
> 
> 
> Anthony writes:
> “Intellectual values include truth, justice, freedom, democracy and, trial by jury. It’s worth noting that the MOQ follows a pragmatic notion of truth so truth is seen as relative in his system while Quality is seen as absolute.  In consequence, the truth is defined as the highest quality intellectual explanation at a given time.
> 
> RMP:
> If the past is any guide to the future this explanation must be taken provisionally; as useful until something better comes along. One can then examine intellectual realities the same way he examines paintings of in an art gallery, not with an effort to find out which one is the ‘real’ painting, but simply to enjoy and keep those that are of value. There are many sets of intellectual reality in existence and we can perceive some to have more quality than others, but that we do so is, in part, the result our history and current patterns of values. (Pirsig, 1991, p.103)”
> 
>      (McWatt, Anthony,MOQ Textbook)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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