Bill, i sent this offline but got bounced by one of your filters. Well,
it's short.
[[ I don't doubt your sincerity, only your California style dharma. ]]
:-) I've never been to California, so can't comment on that attribution.
But i've noticed that the "New Age" epithet is often useful as an excuse
for not investigating whatever it's applied to. I've used it that way
myself, though i've since given up that habit. More generally, people's
reasons for not investigating any line of inquiry are of little or no
use to other people.
If you read Peirce on the scientific enterprise, you'll find that
for him, the true scientist, as a pure seeker after truth, is a very
rare individual indeed -- precisely because his interests are neither
individual nor tied to the aims of some limited community. And if you
investigate Mahayana Buddhist texts seriously, you'll find that the
same is true of the bodhisattva, who is not a transcendent figure to be
worshipped (and thereby kept at a safe distance) but an embodiment of a
path to be lived, an infinite challenge to be met at every moment.
gary F.
}Once the whole is divided, the parts need names. There are already
enough names. One must know when to stop. [Tao Te Ching 32
(Feng/English)]{
gnoxic studies }{ http://users.vianet.ca/gnox/gnoxic.htm
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
