[MD] The first cut.

[118]

On 1/26/12, Andre <andrebroersen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Mark to Andre:
>
> For, if sq were simply a concept this would mean that it does not have to
> exist and can be overturned by another concept.  This loop has to stop
> somewhere don't you agree?
>
> Andre:
> The way I read this Mark is that you stop growth, that you stop further,
> better understanding of what the concept refers to or seeks to explain. To
> use a very general example: the conceptualization of [the workings of] the
> universe after Einstein are quite different than after Newton.
> Isn't Pirsig's conceptualization of the world a much better one than, for
> example the Platonian, Kantian or Hegelian or even the Einsteinian one?

Yes, of course it is.

I don't think I am stopping growth, but I will have to think about
that.  All I was trying to say is that at some point we need to take a
stand and not claim that Quality is a concept which lies relative to
other concepts  If this were true, we would be placing MoQ under the
umbrella of relativism, which makes it "whatever you like".
>
> Isn't it good that once-modern/novel concepts move to the world of 'myth'
> when better concepts are found to replace them? Isn't this part of
> evolution?

Yes, we can say that.  However, I would consider MoQ to be a
rediscovery of a concept which has never left this earth.  It ascribes
to a perennial philosophy, imo.  We understand what we are, using the
concepts of the day.  MoQ is an attempt to translate the old into
modern concepts.  It is going back a ways and starting again on a
better path.  It is not starting from the beginning.  The DNA that
makes up us humans is the same DNA which made up dinosaurs.  There is
no need to reinvent that part of it.  In this analogy, we can consider
the DNA to be perennial.  Just an analogy of course.
>
> Mark:
> Definition:  A dictionary is something that uses dictionary terms.  Does
> this provide you with an "AHA, now I know what a dictionary is"?  I am
> simply pointing towards the creation of a paradox.
>
> Andre:
> There is nothing paradoxical about my dictionary definition Mark:
> 1) a book that lists (usu. in alphabetical order) and explains the words of
> a language or gives equivalent words in another language... (from the Oxford
> concise)
>
> I can copy the rest but you get my drift. How is this a 'redundant
> statement' as you call it 'that has no assumptions or ties, and kind of
> floats like a bubble, separate from everything else it can tie into'?

Andre,
All I was saying was that it does not make any sense to use the word
"dictionary" in the definition of dictionary, other ties are required
to provide meaning.  You do not use "dictionary" in your dictionary
def. above, so I think you get my drift, too.  If we simply say that
"a dictionary is a dictionary" we do not get very far.
>
> Mark:
> 'The survival of the fittest because the fittest survive' Total nonsense in
> my opinion.
>
> Andre:
> That's why it is not used in the MOQ as such. I thought Phaedrus pointed
> that out very clearly in LILA. Seems to me that you are making nonsense of
> my statement that concepts are static intellectual patterns of quality by
> saying that "The concept of sq cannot contain the fact that it is sq
> itself".

Well, I am not making nonsense of your statement, if anything there is
a misunderstanding.  All I am saying is that the concept of sq
embodies all the sq's that we consider.  We cannot say that such
concept is sq itself because that makes what it represents
meaningless.  The concept of dogs is not a dog.
>
> Mark:
> Yes, but would you not say that the "formation of a concept" is experience?
>
> Andre:
> No. The formation of a concept is that which happens after the experience
> has occurred. The experience is pre-intellectual. The formation of a concept
> is an intellectual activity.

Well, I guess we have different interpretations of what experience is.
 I certainly experience my thinking as it happens in real time.
Perhaps I have trained myself to do so.  I would consider an
"activity" to be dynamic as it is happening.  It only becomes static
when we refer to it.  This is my comment about the mirror.  Static
Quality is a reflection, imo.
>
> Mark:
> What I want, is to consider what MoQ means.
>
> Andre:
> I like that and I hope we all do. What it means for us
> personally/socially/intellectually and live and learn in a way that affirms
> the 'interconnectedness of all things' and I agree with Anthony when he
> argues that: "The treatment of Quality through ZMM (its formlessness) and
> LILA (its forms)can, when taken together, be read as reflecting the circle
> of enlightenment, both texts are constructed as Western versions of a Zen
> koan...in order to assist a more Western-oriented mind achieve
> enlightenment"( Anthony's PhD, p44)
>
> As you well know, a koan cannot be solved intellectually. You have to get
> inside it, become it to comprehend it and in that way re-solve it.

Yes, I agree.  A koan releases Dynamic Quality within us, as I see it.
 It breaks down the static barriers that we grow old and disenchanted
with.

I am not sure how "wise" Anthony is in these things, nor have I read
his thesis.  But I do think he is on the right path.  It would all
depend on what he means by enlightenment.

I stand by the Zen tradition as saying that enlightenment is "nothing
much".  It soes not take loads of learning and ritual to achieve.
This was one branch of thinking during the Ch'an (later Zen) Period
which had its heyday around 800 AD.  Anybody can become enlightened at
any time.  All it takes is willingness.  Enlightenment is only one
nanometer just to the right of you, all it takes is the smallest
shift.  Going left only only enhances the left brain, and provides
further resolve to existing in static quality and considering the
sense of Self as ego.  Just an analogy of course.  This is based on
the concept that the 51% of the left brain controls the 49% of the
right brain, it does not take much to balance that.  We need to move
towards the "tipping point" and stay there to remain dynamic.  One
cannot live in SQ or DQ alone.

Thanks Andre,
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
>