[MD] pure experience (DQ)

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 11:10 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
> dmb,
>
> I am saying if Dynamic Quality is undifferentiated, it cannot be about perceptions (smells, sounds, tastes, visions, and feelings) which are differentiated, which require a spacial-temporal framework; and which are dependent on human sense apparatus?   Neither you nor the paper that you were unable to explain, addressed this issues.
>

Dan:

Hey Marsha,
As I read it, your question is explained right here in the snippet
Dave provided:

"For our ability to describe or report a wide-range of tastes and
smells lags far behind our capacity to actually have an experience of
a nearly infinite spectrum of tastes and smells. In other words, the
deliverances of our senses continually run ahead of both our
descriptive vocabularies as well as our conceptual abilities."

Dan comments:
Dynamic Quality is the cutting edge of experience. Describing
experience always lags behind experience itself. "To actually ...
experience" or direct experience (if you will) is seen as synonymous
with Dynamic Quality in the MOQ. What we define from the infinity of
actual (direct) experience is finite static quality.

That includes the spacial-temporal framework and all human sense
apparatus. These are all defined and come after the actual direct
experience running ahead of all this. Note he says 'the deliverances
of our senses' and not our senses. This deliverance of the senses is
experience. Smells, sounds, tastes, visions, and feelings all come
later.

Dan

http://www.danglover.com