[MD] The first cut.

[118]

Marsha,
As you know, whenever you post something you are inviting debate.  If
you do not see it this way, then you are ignoring the process by which
a metaphysics becomes established.  I do ingnore your "existence", I
am addressing the words on a page.  I have no idea who you are nor am
I interested.

Your "gossip" is all part of it.  We do not stand isolated from each
other even though the estrangement provided by the internet would
suggest such a thing.

Cheers,
Mark

On 1/25/12, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
>
> Greetings Horse,
>
> I know, but I don't appreciate gossip.   I am not an interpreter and never
> claimed to be.  I am exploring.   And maybe Mark misses me, but I wish he'd
> ignore my "existence".
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 25, 2012, at 8:28 AM, Horse wrote:
>
>> You've said this in the past Marsha but so far failed to last more than a
>> few days!
>>
>> On 24/01/2012 19:49, MarshaV wrote:
>>> Greetings Horse,
>>>
>>> I think I mentioned last week I'm happy to sit it out for a while.  I'm
>>> tired of all Mark's qustions.  It might be fun to watch from the peanut
>>> gallery for a while.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> Marsha
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On Jan 24, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Horse<horse at darkstar.uk.net>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> I doubt this will make any difference to Marsha, Dave - a lot of this is
>>>> rooted in the SOM as Intellect debacle from some time ago. It doesn't
>>>> matter how much evidence you present or even if Pirsig himself joined in
>>>> the conversation.
>>>>
>>>> Horse
>>>>
>>>> On 24/01/2012 18:40, david buchanan wrote:
>>>>> “A Dynamic advance is meaningless unless it can find some static
>>>>> pattern with which to protect itself from degeneration back to the
>>>>> conditions that existed before the advance was made.  Evolution can't
>>>>> be a continuous forward movement.  It must be a process of ratchet-like
>>>>> steps in which there is a Dynamic movement forward up some new incline
>>>>> and then, if the result looks successful, a static latching-on of the
>>>>> gain that has been made; then another Dynamic advance, then another
>>>>> static latch…” (LILA, end of Chapter 11)
>>>>>
>>>>> "Sometimes a Dynamic increment goes forward but can find no latching
>>>>> mechanism and so fails and slips back to a previous latched position.
>>>>> Whole species and cultures get lost this way. Sometimes a static
>>>>> pattern becomes so powerful that it prohibits any Dynamic moves
>>>>> forward. In both cases the evolutionary process is halted for a while.
>>>>> But when it's not halted the result has been an increase in power to
>>>>> control hostile forces or an increase in versatility or both. The
>>>>> increase in versatility is directed toward DQ. The increase in power to
>>>>> control hostile forces is directed toward static quality. Without DQ
>>>>> the organism cannot grow. Without static quality the organism cannot
>>>>> last. Both are needed." (LILA, end of chapter 11)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "When this understanding first broke through in Phaedrus' mind, that
>>>>> ethics and science had suddenly been integrated into a single system,
>>>>> he became so manic he couldn't think of anything else for days. The
>>>>> only time he had been more manic about an abstract idea was when he had
>>>>> first hit upon the idea of undefined Quality itself. The consequences
>>>>> of that first mania had been disastrous, and so now, this time, he told
>>>>> himself just to calm down and dig in. It was, for him, a great Dynamic
>>>>> breakthrough, but if he wanted to hang on to it he had better do some
>>>>> static latching as quickly and thoroughly as possible." (Lila, end of
>>>>> chapter 12)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dharma, like rta, means 'what holds together.' It is the basis of all
>>>>> order. It equals righteousness. It is the ethical code. It is the
>>>>> stable condition which  gives man perfect satisfaction. ...Dharma is
>>>>> Quality itself, the principle of 'rightness' which gives structure and
>>>>> purpose to the evolution of all life and to the evolving understanding
>>>>> of the universe which life has created." (LILA, Chapter 30)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "No, he did nothing for Quality or the Tao.  What benefited was reason.
>>>>> He showed a way by which reason may be expanded to include elements
>>>>> that have previously been unassimilable and thus have been considered
>>>>> irrational." (ZAMM, p. 257)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "But now we have with us some concepts that greatly alter the whole
>>>>> understanding of things. Quality is the Buddha. Quality is scientific
>>>>> reality. Quality is the goal of Art." (ZAMM, p. 276)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "I want to show that that classic pattern of rationality can be
>>>>> tremendously improved, expanded and made far more effective through the
>>>>> formal recognition of Quality in its operation." (ZAMM, p. 278)
>>>>>
>
>
>
>
> ___
>
>
> 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
>