Dmb:

How can there be thoughts without a thinker? The same way there can be
rain without a rainer. We say "it is raining" without bothering to ask
about the "it" because we know that there is nothing doing the raining
except the rain itself. There is no agent above or beyond the rain which
performs this function. And that's how it is with thinking. Why does
there need to be an agent which performs this task? Why does there need
to be an entity above and beyond the thinking itself? See, from a
certain perspective your question is absurd. It is very much like belief
in the rainer behind the rain, or the thunderer beyond the thunder or
the grower separate from the growth.

As Gav recently pointed out, the individualism you're advocating here is
classic SOM. It is one of the most basic and central ideas in the Modern
West since Descartes. It also happens to be Pirsig's central target in
ZAMM. He deconstructs it with a vengence. 

Ron:
Damn, talk about capturing it all within a paragraph!!! 
spirituality, perception and awareness. To me, you have
just defined how MoQ relates to all of these.

Micah:
There can be no thought without a thinker, again as many times before on
this board, you use man to establish reality, then remove man to define
reality...when man is reality.

Ron:
Man is reality and reality is man. You run anthropocentrism to
the point of solipsism when you follow this line out. What
Dmb is saying is that there is no solid concrete entities
isolated in space. They are interrelated emergences that manifest
through inorganic, organic, biological and social patterns
so that the "self" as perceived as isolated is an illusion.

What you need to do is get a church of Micah going.




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/

Reply via email to