Hi Marsha, You are right, this is enjoyable, and it makes me think in different ways. I am learning so much.
cheers, Willblake2 On May 3, 2009, at 1:21:36 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: Will, All my life I've been taught and thought 'That is a tree.', now the tree is everything and my thoughts are insignificant bits of entrapment. This reminds me of my very first parachute jump, until the parachute opened fully, my legs were working frantically trying to stand up. And maybe, too, I enjoy the puzzle-solving aspect of these discussions. Marsha At 02:00 AM 5/3/2009, you wrote: >Hi Marsha, > >You may be right about the prejudice. I feel that having had a scientific >training and now viewing that view, as you do, as patterns >conceptually constructed >gives me some perspective. I am saying the same thing as you are. >I wouldn't stop at science however, philosophy, art description, music >discussion, they are all patterns that the brain creates. It is >what is outside >the brain, the heart, the body, yet interpreted by the body that interests me. >Science not different from philosophy or metaphysics. They are all >constructs. > >In my opinion, by defining Quality and SQ, you are taking a very >scientific approach to your understanding. There is really no >understanding, simply you interacting with everything else. I believe >I am no separate from everything else, but am everything else. >I know this to be true since I feel it. Can't explain it, however. > >Keep building your understanding until you become comfortable with >it. It can be understood outside of your brain. You are not your brain. > >Conceptualizing, by definition, is limiting. > >Cheers, > >Willblake2 > > >On May 1, 2009, at 1:17:09 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > >Hello Will, > >It has been interesting to think about science, quantum this and >that, evolutionary this and that, genetic this and that, all >fascinating, like daffodils as yellow this and thats. Science as a >general pattern is very large and powerful; it is an institution >capable of producing both benevolence and malevolence. I am not >willing to judge science as being more than 'it is what it is', >patterns conceptually constructed and existing conventionally. I >could never settle for the theories that science provides, and think >you, being a trained scientist, are a bit too prejudice. > >I sometimes wonder if Bo is correct in thinking it would be best to >describe the Intellectual Level as the S/O level, but maybe that's >just reflecting my own conceptual limitations. > > >Marsha > > > >At 01:27 AM 5/1/2009, you wrote: > > >Hi Marsha, > > > >The big bang theory has some problems with it. I think the > >whole idea is based on our infatuation with evolution. Because > >we think we can explain why animal bones look the way they > >do, we use it to explain everything. I have presented by view of > >evolution in previous posts. > > > >Tom van Flandern has a good article on the issues with the > >big bang, showing how most data supports a static universe, > >at http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/DidTheUniverseHaveABeginning.asp > > > >Don't believe everything those scientist tell you (I know you don't :-). > > > >Cheers, > >Willblake2 > > > >On Apr 30, 2009, at 8:24:20 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > >At 11:13 AM 4/30/2009, you wrote: > > >Marsha: > > > > > >The age of the universe would be shorter than the age of oldest > stars. This > > >contradiction implies that either 1) our measurement of the > Hubble constant > > >is incorrect, 2) the Big Bang theory is incorrect or 3) that we > need a form > > >of matter like a cosmological constant that implies an older age > for a given > > >observed expansion rate > > > > > >Hi Marsha, > > > > > >Or that there are/ have been more 'bangs'.? > > > > > >Andre > > > > > >Bangettes? Do-lang-do-lang-do-lang... > > > > > >. > >_____________ > > > >Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars......... > >. > >. > > > >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/ > > > > > >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/ > >. >_____________ > >Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars......... >. >. > >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/ > > >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/ . _____________ Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars......... . . 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/ 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/
