[MD] Dynamic quality, openness, possibiliy and absence

[MarshaV]

Greetings David and Ian,

You are correct, it was rude not to respond.  Iain McGilchrist's book was mentioned once before and I purchased an e.copy.  I started reading and was very enthusiastic, but I am not comfortable with Kindle and drifted away.  Seeing the book mentioned again I reordered a paperback version so I may read and perform my typical highlighting, indexing and marginalia.  Been super busy so I have not had time to view youtube suggestions, but I will.  When this is complete perhaps I will move on to 'Incomplete Nature'.   

I am indeed happy that David Morley is again participating and presenting new ideas.  I really long for the stimulation.  

 
Marsha


On Feb 17, 2013, at 5:26 AM, Ian Glendinning <ian.glendinning at gmail.com> wrote:

> Actual point:
> 
> Having now read "Incomplete Nature" by Terrence Deacon, I have to
> agree with David, this is an excellent book; one any MoQ'er should
> read. (I do have some criticisms, but on the whole it's a great
> synthesis of may other sources I've blogged about in the last few
> years. Thanks David.)
> 
> Think absence - the existence only of openness to possibility - DQ as
> the missing ingredient in the SOM world and you should easily see the
> parallel. If you're interested in the wider science and philosophy of
> mind, value in humanity vs reductive science and philosophy of science
> debates, then there is a lot more besides.
> 
> PS / Aside / Meta-point: (Start another thread if you want to respond here.)
> 
> Interesting that no-one else has responded to this 3 day old post from
> David, one of 3 or 4 he posted recommending reads from "outside"
> Pirsigland. The one I did respond to (also very positively) sparked
> busy threads entirely about my jokey aside about a typo David pointed
> out he had made in his mail - about value being beyond precise
> definition of words. Now tell me MD (with only a couple of exceptions
> I could name) is not trapped inside a cage of language. (You will.
> Defensively. Angrily, ad-hominem attack is the best form of
> defensively ..... go on, surprise me.)
> 
> Ian
> 
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:51 AM, David Morey <davidint at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> Hi all
>> 
>> Good to be back after a long absence. Well on that subject,
>> I suggested many years ago that dynamic quality could be
>> more fully and better understood by thinking about how it
>> relates to openness and immaterial possibilities that are
>> somehow present to experience but absent as realised
>> things or SQ. Well Terrence W Deacon has written the key text
>> on this sort of thinking:
>> 
>> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Incomplete-Nature-Mind-Emerged-Matter/dp/0393049914/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1360842550&sr=8-1
>> 
>> I think that all MOQers should find this a very interesting read.
>> 
>> Here is a an excellent interview with Deacon explaining the key ideas:
>> 
>> http://www.virginiacampbellmd.com/blog/2012/7/15/incomplete-nature-with-terrence-deacon-podcast-interview.html
>> 
>> All the best
>> David Morey
>>