[MD] First Division 2.0

[Joseph Maurer]

Hi David,

A logic of a metaphysics of DQ/SQ, begs the question:  How can an
indefinable DQ have meaning?

In SOM S depends on O activity in the definition in existence.  S has no
definition in existence awaiting O's behavior.

Different activities determine a reality manifesting existence.  Evolution,
a definable activity in existence, is not founded on deniable faith.  It
manifests a logic of activity.

The truth of reality in logic for metaphysics is a nightmare of deniability.
The reality of evolutionary levels in differences for S's manifestations is
deniable.  It awaits an interpretation of the manifestation in action.

Evolution is deniable.  No one can give what he doesn't have. Evolution as
the answer for levels in existence is deniable.  Physical logic instead of
indefinable metaphysics!

Pirsig tweaked S/O metaphysics by changing indescribable S to DQ, an
indefinable reality.  O as SQ remains.

DQ, indefinable reality, has a relationship to existence. DQ is not the same
as the S of SOM which sucks existence from O.  DQ has a place in indefinable
existence awaiting valuation not non-existence. SOM and MOQ.  DQ/SQ is a
statement of an indefinable/definable reality.

A statement of metaphysics: the concept of evolution describes reality in
existential differences as evolution in levels in existence.  DQ is
indefinable levels in existence. Indefinable not unknowable or non-existent!

MOQ, Evolution is not a reality in SOM. S exists independently from O in
reality.  DQ does not depend on SQ for existence. It creates a new paradigm
DQ/SQ where DQ is indefinable not non-existent, SQ is definable.

Imho  In MOQ different levels in reality in existence. Evolution has
meaning.  

SOM differs from MOQ in using Object as enabling possibilities in a Subject
without defining how the subject participates in evolution as a level in
existence.  

In SOM freewill, seeks another for further definition in existence. Without
the other it is not free.  It is orphaned in being removed from the
existence in the subject and highlighted as a special function in relation
to another instead of being the will of the subject.

In SOM, levels in evolution have no foundation in the existence of the
subject.  They only have meaning in the object and have their meaningful
relationship to the subject through the object and evolution is meaningless.
Metaphysics of the known also follow the existence of the subject for unique
qualities like free will.

I don't define DQ!  While pondering an indefinable existing reality emotions
shouted look at us!  The best of both worlds.

Joe    


On 3/2/12 1:48 PM, "David Harding" <davidjharding at gmail.com> wrote:

> Furthermore, why do you see value in defining the undefinable DQ as
> 'emotions'?