Arlo:
> So this is beating a dead horse a bit, and I've lost
> the reason we
> are even arguing this out, and cluttering SA's tiny
> skull,
SA: Though this tiny skull may clutter, that is due
to my lose of effort in sustaining clarity, which I
haven't dipped into clutter, my clarity remains. This
tiny skull is mainly an experience when I don't get
it, understand, have no clue, and get lost due to my
limited knowledge - for I am explicit about not
knowing everything. Tiny skull is a way for me to be
explicit that I'm trying to humble my mind to open up
to something that I'm well aware to not know of. Tiny
skull is a way to express honor with bending reed.
Tiny skull is an active opening of my heart to this
karmakaya light.
Arlo:
> ...and if semiosis is your word of choice, then
semiosis it
> is. But you won't
> get me to agree that unconscious, non-symbolic
> neural activity is
> "thought" any more than I can apparently get you to
> agree that it's not.
SA: I agree with differentiating between thought and
non-symbolic activity. This doesn't mean there is not
an emergence event where these coalesce. Arlo, I'm
still wondering why you reason out differentiation
between verbal and semiosis or maybe you don't. I'm
really a tiny skull (I'm really not getting it, but I
want to get, that's what I'm saying, so, please, bear
with me.)
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
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/
