[Platt] As pointed out several times, the "mystic viewpoint" of self is not mentioned in Lila.
[Arlo] "The language we've inherited confuses this. We say "my" body and "your" body and "his" body and "her" body, but it isn't that way. That's like a FORTRAN program saying, "this is my computer." "1 his body on the left," and "This body on the right." That's the way to say it. This Cartesian "Me," this autonomous little homunculus who sits behind our eyeballs looking out through them in order to pass judgment on the affairs of the world, is just completely ridiculous. This self-appointed little editor of reality is just an impossible fiction that collapses the moment one examines it. This Cartesian "Me" is a software reality, not a hardware reality. This body on the left and this body on the right are running variations of the same program, the same "Me," which doesn't belong to either of them. The "Me's" are simply a program format." (LILA) "The value is between the stove and the oaths. Between the subject and the object lies the value. This value is more immediate, more directly sensed than any "self" or any "object" to which it might be later assigned. Whether the stove is the cause of the low quality or whether possibly something else is the cause is not yet absolutely certain. But that the quality is low is absolutely certain. It is the primary empirical reality from which such things as stoves and heat and oaths and self are later intellectually constructed." (LILA) "Everyone seemed to be guided by an "objective," "scientific" view of life that told each person that his essential self is his evolved material body. Ideas and societies are a component of brains, not the other way around." (LILA) 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/
