Doug's Dimensions, truth, and SOM vis-à-vis MoQ post:
Subject: | Dimensions, truth, and SOM vis-à-vis MoQ. |
Date: | Sun, 11 Jul 1999 04:09:55 -0700 |
From: | Doug Renselle <NOFLAMEqtx{at}earthlink{dot}netNOSPAM> |
Organization: | The Quantonics Society & Quantonics, Inc. |
To: |
quantonics email list post <quantonics@topica.com> (To post to our email list, you must subscribe. See instructions on our top page.) |
(Site manager comment: minor edits to fix links and clarify.)
Quantonics Email List Message Kuntz,
Acronyms used in this post:
DQ - Dynamic Quality
MoQ - Metaphysics of Quality
QE - Quality Event
SOM - Subject-Object Metaphysics
SPoV - Static/Stable Pattern(s) of Value
SQ - Static Quality
ZMM - Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
In future, I will use a list of acronyms at start of each quanto email.
On better understanding SOM:
As Dan avers, and most of our prescient antecedents tell us,
language in our Western world is about SOM
stuff. Why? English defines nearly all its terms presuming purely
Aristotelian objects inform reality. As a
result, English possesses innate (i.e., anthropocentrically designed-in)
SOM bias. Apparently other
languages like German, Greek, Latin, etc. have similar difficulty
describing a more quantum reality. Bohr,
et al., call this our "language problem." (Note, however,
in my own reading of Fritjof Capra's The Tao of
Physics, his quotes about Chinese descriptions of reality,
in my opinion, disclose similar innate (not
intrinsic!) biases to objective reality.)
What is going on here? How is SOM and its Western language
bias distinct from Pirsig's MoQ and its
Zen, Hindu, American Indian, pragma-tic, and quantum science flavors?
SOM:
MoQ:
SOM language describes and defines SOM. It is not designed to describe and define MoQ.
Kuntz, in your first email, you speak of points, lines, planes,
and 3-space. With a touch of 4-space with
time added. All of that is pure SOM. SOM is fine if you want to
stay in a small box, a local context
defined by SOM's extremely limited assumptions. But if you want
to move to a more general reality, you
must adopt a larger, more comprehensive set of assumptions. For
me, both MoQ and quantum science
(philosophy parent, science child) offer that extended realm.
The implications of moving from SOM to
MoQ are almost unfathomable. But just a glimmer of them opens
new vistas of enlightenment out of
SOM's reach.
I just made a tiny scratch in a much larger picture, but I
think the above will lay decent foundation for your
own further progress here.
Mtty,
Doug.
©Quantonics, Inc., 1999-2006 Rev. 25Dec99 PDR Created 11Jul99 PDR