On 14 Feb 2009 at 2:47, [email protected] wrote: > Bo before: > > > I have tried in vain to get what Michael "thesis" is. > > MP: > > That could be because I haven't really got one. ;-) But if I had > to ... > > Bo: You trailed off , and so do I, I'll wait until the buzz subsides. > Right now you act like a silent movie hero fencing left and right. > MP: ?? The comment following the trail off had a trail *on* which noted the following comment would explain things. I've reproduce it below. The last three paragraphs provide you what you request.
However, to be clear... I'm not here with a preconceived notion and something to prove. I don't have a pre-determined thesis which I am seeking to defend. I am here with some ideas, beliefs and thoughts, to be sure. I am reacting to some things I read here which fly in the face of what I have come to understand about some of the those things. But I am here with a desire to expand my understanding, not defend it. The very idea of "having a thesis" is contrary to that process, its a static position seeking to defend itself. In contrast, while I hold certain beliefs and have certain ideas and thoughts which are relatively static, and as such less apt to easily change than some others, I am here to expand on them, even if it means they change from what they were. I don't understand that to be a "thesis" approach. But, FWIW, the last three paragraphs are where I was at the time: > > Bo said > > I have tried in vain to get what Michael "thesis" is. > MP: That could be because I haven't really got one. ;-) But if I had to ... > > > Bo said > > [MoQ] is neither a-theist nor anti-theist, it just encompasses everything. > > Religions are static social patterns. > > The "semitic" type religions that is. The Eastern Tradition has > > transcended social (faith) and intellectual (skepticism) and > > reached some Quality like insight. > MP: ... I'd say its in there somewhere. > > Where you make the distinction of "Western" and "Eastern" you and many > here also automatically appear to make a like and respectively associated > distinction of "Theistic" and "Non-theistic." But I know from personal > (Eastern > theistic) experience this is not an inherent or inextricable connection of > West/Theistic or Eastern/Non-theistic, but only a historically and culturally > coincidental one. > > Theism is not incapable of the same transcendence of social and intellectual > on > the personal esoteric level you rightly attribute to Eastern faiths; I and > those > who taught me and practice my particular faith are living proof. I am the > first to > admit its the rare case in Western (or even Eastern) theistic manifestations, > but > it is *not* impossible. It is in my opinion *culture* which drives / has > driven this > particular aspect of most theistic beliefs, rather than it having been a > direct > attribute of their theistic nature. > > Relating this then to the MoQ, it is my opinion, that while the MoQ is not > theistic > in nature, this is not to say that anti-theism is a quality direction in MoQ > terms. > MoQ, as a view of reality, is anti-theistic primarily in the sense that it > explains > *all* of reality (essential and mystical) in one common systemic language. It > alleviates theism of being the primary experience in explaining the mystical. > > But that said it simply *does not follow* that this means theism cannot remain > (and I > dare say be cultivated to be) a force for high quality, or more so that its > elimination would be somehow be a high quality direction for society or > culture to value. MP ---- "Don't believe everything you think." 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/
