Marsha --
I suggest you watch the movie 'Mindwalk' again, specifically listening to
the information presented by the physicist. She talks about everything
being connected to everything, and the
need for a NEW world-view.
It sounds like you are accusing RMP of temerity for not
acknowledging a "creator". I accused you of arrogance
for thinking you can define and confine things outside your
ability to know. The 'primary source' 'creator', and 'purpose' that you
insist upon are a mere conception in the minds of you and others like you.
Temerity, as defined in my dictionary, is rash or presumptive daring.
Pirsig would have been "temerararious" had he denied a Creator. That he
simply dismisses it, and has nothing to offer but DQ as his primary source,
is hardly a "daring" position for a philosopher in our nihilistic age.
The primary source and purpose that I propose is, indeed, a conception
(hypothesis) that I have developed. This is true of most philosophies. I
do not "insist upon" my definitions being accepted by others, although the
consistent use of definitions is important in understanding the terms and
principles of Essentialism. By the way, none of us has access to absolute
truth or knowledge, nor do I claim to "know" the ineffable. I think the MD
participants are aware that philosophical cosmologies are theory.
I do intend to review "Mindwalk" (sorry to have mistitled it in my last
post) as soon as I have a suitable opportunity.
Thanks, Marsha.
--Ham
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/
