>woods previously:
>     I don't know what you mean.  The static part of social patterns are
>social spov's.

Marsha:
I'm saying the content might be inorganic, biological, social or 
intellectual, but the vehicle (pattern) is mental.


woods:
    The vehicle is mental if that's the direction you want to come at this.  
I know as a person that for me to understand a tree, I can do this mentality, 
but 
as Pirsig noted there is another way to understand called value.  I think I'm 
trying to come at this "pattern" from a value orientation, not strictly a 
mental 
orientation that has value, but is not the third understanding in which Pirsig 
named 
these 3 as physical, mental, and value.  A mental orientation has value, but 
value 
is also inorganic, organic, social, and dynamic.  Value is another 
understanding that 
comes at this, I think, in another way other than strictly mental.


>Marsha previously:
>A phenomena, like a tree, does not exist as an independent entity in
>nature.
>
>woods previously:
>     Right.  A tree has roots into the earth and breaths air and gets light
>for food from the sun.  This isn't a rock.  This is a tree.

Marsha:
Nature doesn't differentiate any of these things.  Not tree, root, 
earth, air, light, food, sun, rock or tree.  These names and their 
associated definitions are human invention.

woods:
   I'm not talking about the names.  I'm talking about the value tree, 
value root, etc...  The names are human inventions.  The names are 
to come at this from a strictly intellectual spov.

    Marsha:
It is human nature to dissect, name and define, but not Nature.  

   woods:
I'm not dissecting and naming.  I can, but that's where I'm trying to 
come at this.  I could.  And it can easily be taken that I am coming 
at this in that manner, but I'm not.  Pirsig mentioned a mental way to 
understand.  I'm trying to understand in a value way.  Again, mental 
is a good way.  It has value.  But value is not restricted to mental only.


Marsha:
But as we are not separate from Nature, this dissecting, naming, and 
defining is a natural process too.
I'm just investigating static patterns of value.  I am curious.  Does 
it matter?  Probably not so much.  Better to experience the wind pass 
across my forehead.

woods:
    The wind would be a static pattern of value, that doesn't depend on my 
mentality 
to create it.  I can sit back and experience this wind without breaking it down 
as a bird 
sings and the comfort of the chair, etc... is all happening at once.

>Marsha previously:
>   Nature doesn't differentiate, humans do using static
>patterns.
>
>woods previously:
>     A tree differentiates itself from a rock and vice verse.

Marsha:
I do not think a tree experiences itself as a separate entity. Nor a rock.

woods:
    A tree is not a rock.  Didn't say they were separate.  When a rock is 
broken down 
by tree roots and when rain chemically leeches elements from rocks, a direct 
connection between the two is noticed.



>Marsha previously:
>     Without the static pattern of value there is no differentiated tree.
>
>   woods previously:
>    It's not a rock.  It's a tree.  The tree and rock differentiate 
> themselves.



Marsha:
I don't think so.  As I said above, a tree doesn't experience having 
a self.  Neither does a rock.

   woods:
    A tree is not a rock.  Didn't say they had independent self's.  They 
are very connected.


>Marsha previously:
>I don't think we can go any further.  Our understanding of patterns
>is too far apart.  Thank you, I've enjoyed the exchange.

>woods previously:
>ok, it seems that way.


Marsha:
The Universe is uncaused, like a net of jewels in which each is a 
reflection of all the others in a fantastic, interrelated harmony without end.


woods:
   Didn't say the universe is caused.  Sure they are a net of jewels that 
reflect 
in each other.  This is an interrelated harmony without end.  Don't see 
why it has to be based in the human mind.  That seems to be a cause and self 
for you.  But I know your not saying a cause and self is here, do you know that 
I'm 
agreeing with your statement?  It seems not.


woods

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
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