[MD] Is Quality a monism?

[MarshaV]

Greetings,

First, I do believe I was writing about the MOQ being monistic, where reality, the world, is said to be nothing but value.  Second, I changed the word I used for expanded rationality for hypothesis to hypothetical.  


Marsha. 



On Jun 28, 2012, at 1:37 PM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Ron,
> 
> First of all, Marsha considers any knowledge to be a hypothesis.  A
> hypothesis is a form of knowledge.  This would make knowledge of
> something a form of knowledge.  Anyone can see that this is simply a
> play on words, and will not lead anywhere.
> 
> For Quality to be a monism, it must be conjectured to exist as an
> entity, as described by Marsha as "the source of all that exists".
> That is, it must exist separate from "all that exists".  I do not
> believe that this is a useful interpretation of Quality, for then we
> revert to religious aspects of such metaphysics.
> 
> Others, including myself, have suggested that Quality is "The Event".
> That is, it does not underlie any static phenomena, but is the process
> of such phenomena.  This Event is occurring in the present tense.  An
> event can have a tendency, and in MoQ this tendency is "betterness".
> In Taoism this "event" can be translated as "The Way", which reading
> of the Tao Te Ching will reveal (if read in that way).  The tendency
> of the Way is to defy resistance.  One issue in the modern world is
> that we tend to embrace resistance.
> 
> By describing Quality as the cause of results, we are not left with
> anything static to hold on to.  One can personalize such Quality by
> describing it as an Intention, or a Relationship.  A relationship
> exists between two things (for example), but is NOT either of those
> things.  In fact, one can simply turn the logic and say that the
> relationship CREATES the two things.  I have brought this in to the
> discussion a number of times; one time poetically by describing
> Quality as "the golden threads" that lie between, create, and holds
> together.  In another analogy which I have used, Quality is like the
> "event" of lava pouring through a fissure.  Always coming anew and
> building.  Not to be taken literally of course.
> 
> When I explain Quality to others around here, I have found that by
> using the "event" metaphor, those listening can intuitively grasp what
> I am presenting, and stay away from the concept of monism.  I am not
> sure if this is useful to you.
> 
> Cheers,
> Mark
> 
> 
> On 6/28/12, X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com> wrote:
>> Marsha had stated to Joe:
>> 
>> The context for my comment was quite an indictment of the intellect's
>> shortcomings by Schopenhauer.  I think, though, that the value can be
>> improved if the dualism implied by knowledge-of-some-thing is understood and
>> remains as hypothetical. The MoQ is afterall a monism (with Quality the
>> source of all that exists.)  At its highest, static (patterned) quality  may
>> represent the best value available at the moment, but it does have its
>> fallibilities  At least, imho.
>> 
>> 
>> Ron asks:
>> Some questions directed at Ant-
>> 
>> Is Quality a Monism? firstly, it should be clear we are speaking of static
>> quality and when we are speaking
>> of monads we are speaking about unity, oneness, whole. It tends to lend to
>> the idea of completeness.
>> 
>> The encapsulization as it were.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ..
>> 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
>> 
> 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