[MD] Where does DQ end and SQ begin and SQ end and DQ begin?It's all bananas isn't it?

[Dan Glover]

Well, yes. That is what I was addressing too. Anyway... did I mention
I never much liked bananas? :)

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 3:44 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
>
> Dan,
>
> To should have written:  There is unpatterned, non-dualistic experience, and that is what I was addressing.
>
>
> Thank you,
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 1, 2013, at 3:30 AM, Dan Glover <daneglover at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> We 'experience' Dynamic Quality all the time. The thing is, the term
>> experience is a static quality representation of that which cannot be
>> fully defined even though we define 'it' all the time.
>
> Dah...  All words are static quality representation!
>
>
>
>> "In a subject-object metaphysics, this experience is between a
>> preexisting object and subject, but in the MOQ, there is no
>> pre-existing subject or object. Experience and Dynamic Quality become
>> synonymous." [Robert Pirsig, Lila's Child]
>
> "But with a Metaphysics of Quality the empirical experience is not an experience of 'objects.' It's an experience of value patterns produced by a number of sources, not just inorganic patterns."
>
>      (RMP, 'LILA', Chapter 26)
>
> This quote is of course beyond your point, but an interesting statement to consider in regards to "experiencing" static patterns.
>
>
>
>> So, within the context of the MOQ, to say we experience Dynamic
>> Quality is a bit of a misnomer. No?
>
> No, not in my experience.  There is unpatterned, non-dualistic experience, and that is what I was addressing.
>
>
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:59 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Greetings All,
>>>
>>> Just for the record, I am not confining the term 'process' to _words_.  Taste, feel, sight, smell and sound are all process too.  imho.  So I might suggest that an experience of Dynamic Quality might seem like a mental version of 'white noise'.   Nothing divisible, nothing definable and nothing knowable
>>>
>>>
>>> Marsha
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 27, 2013, at 7:41 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi David,
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps experienced, but not yet processed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Marsha
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 27, 2013, at 5:36 PM, "David Morey" <davidint at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Marsha
>>>>>
>>>>> If DQ is unique (patternless) it cannot be divided into anything else, it cannot be defined in relation
>>>>> to anything else, but we can surely know it via experience I would suggest. What do
>>>>> you think?

http://www.danglover.com