[David M]
Hi Ron
I sense that we are failing to communicate too.
We can only exchange words and hope that we uncover a way to communicate
better.
I offered ny thoughts to see if they helped with your problem but
apparently they do not.
But if you want to keep trying feel free. But yes I fail to see that
what you are calling a problem is one. You may have a
perspective/experience I do not have, or maybe I have solved the problem
and have the tools you lack. So far I can't tell.
[SA]
Yes, when you get to this point, then it will seem as if we're
arguing to the point where our relationship is in jeopardy, but our
relationship is not in jeopardy from where I sit. I really did not see
this as an argument threatening our relationship, a philosophical
argument yes, but our relationship, no. This is why the MoQ has no
Truth, but it does have a bunch a little truths runnin' around.
[Ron]
David, SA,
I do not see it as a problem so much as something to consider. Language
at this level of communication
has become difficult for me. I'm attempting to express a consideration
along with questioning an idea.
I was not really stating that communication is useless or that the
relationship is in jeopardy, only that it,
at this level, it has lost it's meaning for me, and to push it further
was to risk a conflict based on emotions
rather than ideas.
On the way to Ocean city MD for the annual bike week Saturday, I had a
lot of time to think and regroup.
I thought about experience as I was rolling along DE rte 1 south bound
at 80 mph trying to catch up
with the rest of the group who have newer machines and a 5 speed tranny.
During this dynamic experience
I was very aware of our discussions, the rush was overwhelming. I began
to chuckle when the thought of
the old cartoons of the coyote and the roadrunner popped into my head.
Coyote was static and used SOM.
Roadrunner is dynamic, reminded me of Intellect and experience.
We can only know reality by what the senses (those of sight, smell,
taste, hearing, touch .ad infinum)
express to the brain which is another complex system of processes to
produce awareness.
One can argue that in the process of essembly in the brain, shape,color,
description from memory
comes together to form pre-intellectual experience.
To go even deeper, we see sense data itself is differental
in nature also and falls within the limits of the organ. That which is
sensable by the organ
and that which is not. (ie. a deaf person may still feel vibration of
sound even though their ears
can not)
I'm not saying reality and existence rests on this differential quality,
I'm saying experience rests within
the ability of the organ, the differential data itself. We really can't
know what reality is or existence
other than through the senses .
So when people say you can drop subject object distinction, I say you
can not drop it all together.
Pirsigs exact words are ""Zen Buddhists talk about 'just sitting,' a
meditative practice in which the
idea of a duality of self and object does not dominate one's
consciousness.
What I'm talking about here in motorcycle maintenance is 'just fixing,'
in which the idea of a
duality of self and object doesn't dominate one's consciousness. When
one isn't dominated by
feelings of separateness from what he's working on, then one can be said
to 'care' about what
he's doing.(ZMM, Chapter 25)
Not Dominating one's consciousness, hardly "dropping" it. When people
glibbly talk of being caught up
in SOM I argue we are all caught up in SOM we are emmersed in it. The
intellection of Quality
is not allowing duality to dominate consciousness.
Thanks for listening, SA, David, I think I understand why monks will
take a vow of silence because
of the difficulty language can present.
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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
