Thank you for responding to my previous post which was written to you and which took me a day to write.
If you're not going to reciprocate the courtesy of taking time and care by responding to my writing, then why should I continue to spend my time discussing the MOQ with you?
If you do respond however, I am all ears.
On Saturday, 3 March 2012 at 9:38 AM, 118 wrote:
> David, > If indeed emotions are a response to quality as you quote as an > important statement, then you are creating two categories, one which > is quality and one which is not (unless you are using this quote > within a different context). Where do you see the separating line for > these two categories? Both DQ and sq contain the word quality. What > lies outside of that? > > Joe, is using the undefinability of emotions, not their static > representations with words or concepts. That would be just plain > silly, for an emotion is not a word or a concept, it comes way before > that. Words are only used to "explain" an emotion, they are NOT THE > emotion. There is nothing static about the emotion itself, it comes > before the static. We cannot understand such a thing since it is not > definable. > > One should read what Joe is saying, not what one is interpreting. > Your question comes from a projection of your making. This is, of > course, the problem with words. They are always incomplete, and can > be misleading, such as the way you interpret Pirsig's quote. > > Mark > > > On 3/2/12, David Harding <davidjharding@gmai... (mailto:davidjharding@gmai...)> wrote: > > Hi Joseph, > > > DQ is a metaphysical term, indefinable in levels in existence, evolution. > > > DQ is not non-existent. Behavior follows existence DQ/SQ. Emotions are DQ. > > > > > > > > > This is contrary to what Pirsig has claimed: > > > > "As I understand it the term “emotivism” is a way of reducing all value to > > biology, thus making it a part of the SOM universe. The MOQ sees emotions as > > a biological response to quality and not the same thing as quality. There > > are many cases, particularly in economic activity where values occur without > > any emotion." - LC > > > > Why do you see value in reducing the MOQ to an emotional response? > > > > Furthermore, why do you see value in defining the undefinable DQ as > > 'emotions'? > > > > -David. > > > > 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 > >