[MD] Quality Awareness

[Ant McWatt]

Mark Smit stated June 10th:



> We create puzzle pieces and then put them together in meaningful ways.



Ant McWatt comments:





Bonjour Mark,   



Understandably, I'm  slightly perplexed by these "puzzle pieces"
that you refer to.  I guess you must be talking about jigsaw puzzles
which is rather neat (though I thought all the jigsaw factories had all closed down in the West and
moved to China).



Good news for those patriotic jigsaw fans if not though! 



> Once put together, the boundaries disappear, and a seamless picture
emerges. 



Great.  That's double neat.  Now I hope this "seamless
picture" you're talking about is technology related and not related to a
chemical imbalance of some sort.



> These pieces can be considered as SQ. 



Easy now, my friend.  If you have a seamless picture, how can you have
"pieces"?



> The act of putting them together involves DQ. 



Really?  I think all actions are... SQ.  They might be inspired by DQ
(which is a subtle if important difference).







> The picture can be one of Quality. Once

> the new awareness is formed, one no longer needs to linger in how the

> pieces were put together and one can leave MoQ behind. Lingering in

> MoQ for too long is like staying in a church hoping to find

> enlightenment there amongst the pillars and never leaving. SQ and DQ

> can be considered as useful puzzle pieces, for beginning one's

> journey. 



One's journey to where, we wonder?  A Magical Mystery Tour?



> MoQ exists as a mode for sharing an awareness of the world,

> this is why Pirsig created it, so that he could explain the manner in

> which he saw the world before words. 



For that we should be grateful though I always thought Pirsig just wanted to
improve the Quality of his life.



> He also stresses not to get too

> bogged down in the terminology and methods, for that is not Quality.



For Dr Smith of Imperial College has said so... 







> It is always important to understand that MoQ as written is SQ, and

> that it seeks to embody a grand manner in which to apprehend reality.

> SQ must be opposed by something else for SQ to stand out. This is DQ.

> Perhaps it is important to investigate how these two fit together to

> form the puzzle. Perhaps this has already been done in a meaningful

> way by many in this forum and they are free from the division of SQ

> and DQ.



Many are called but few are chosen!



> In the past I have tried to describe a manner for becoming aware of

> Quality by presenting what I called the focussed attention attribute

> of our brains. 



A truly inspiring idea!



> I distinguish such attention from the underlying

> "subconscious" which includes the entire body. As such, what we
are

> attentive to is not the same as what we are aware of. 



Really?  Sounds like that chemical imbalance is kicking in.



> The latter

> leads to the former. Attentiveness is converted to words, awareness

> cannot be directly converted since it must first be further

> manipulated. In this post I will present a similar concept except

> through the presentation of science... [ad nauseam] 



Kind of typical.  You think Mark is finally going to say something
substantial regarding the MOQ but you get disappointed even before you've read
half a post.  Where's the fun in that?  Never get too attached to
things as the Buddha once said, or was it twice or even thrice... My memory
(and, sadly, my Sanskrit fails me).  Answers on a postcard, please.







Best wishes (especially to Joe and Antonio!),



Ant







.