On <12:24 PM 6/4/2009> you responded to my post, paraphrasing
Krishnamurti and David Bohm, with "Well they got it backwards
then. Truth is abstract, logical, of the word. Reality is direct
sensory experience, of the image." And then you sited a book by
Jaques Ellul.
What was your point? And what is the point of your pinky, toes and
brushing your teeth; metaphysically speaking, these statements are
important why? And since the subject of these posts makes "your eyes
sorta glaze over", why did you think you could creatively add
something of interest to the topic?
Self to me is the definition below, ego is the mistaken belief that
the patterns you experience are your creation and yours to own.
Marsha
At 12:44 AM 6/5/2009, you wrote:
>
>
>> How is judgement related to Quality? Judgement is our apprehension of
>> Quality? Judgement is the subjective realization of non-subjective
>> Quality?
>>
>
> Quality creates subject and object, so the subject judgement is secondary.
Metaphysically speaking, I agree. But personally speaking, judgement occurs
to me first - it is primary. If I perceive at all, it is out of some
judgement - even to the extent of judging whether something I experience is
real or not, the first thing I sense is a judgement - a correspondence
between consciousness and reality. I can grasp this event as a creation of
Quality - but my primary experience of this Quality event is a judgement
that defines myself.
My apprehension of other is a form of judgement. My judgement informs me of
me.
Like I said...
Sigh. So much to ponder, so little time.
>>
>> I admit my eyes sorta glaze over when someone tries to explain insight
>> using
>> words about something beyond thought and language. I mean, what IS the
>> point?
>>
>
> The point is experience without self-ego.
And the point of that is? I'm not trying to be obstreperous. It's just
that my self-ego seems to be a such a useful intellectual construct and
while I believe those who claim it is possible to transcend
self-consciousness I wonder in all sincerity, why? As long as I don't base
my metaphysical presuppositions on this handy creation, it seems useful for
walking around and dealing with the world in the way that occurs to me. In
a minute, I'm gonna use mine to go brush my teeth for me.
> Sure you can call it Quality. You can call it anything and fall
>> into whatever word trap you prefer. I'll just go ahead and park in my
>> driveway.
>>
>
>
> Chopping wood might be nice.
>
Well I tell you, last time I chopped wood my self-ego really came in handy.
But lately I've been peeling poles cuz it's good therapy for a broken
pinky; chopping is too jarring.
>> "Abstract cleverness of mind only separates the thinker from the world of
>> reality, and that world, the Forest of Real Life, is in a desperate
>> condition now because of too many who think too much and care too little."
>>
>
> Yes, I could agree if you mean caring with head, heart and hand.
Absolutely. I like that. Head, heart and hands.
And pinkies.
And toes.
I mention toes because one of my big ones is being pounced upon and clawed
and bitten by a tiny kitten right now as I'm writing this, and I'm having to
take care to wiggle it carefully.
J
------------
The self is a point along a dynamic continuum, evolving toward Quality by
Choice.
------------
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/
.
_____________
The self is a thought-flow of ever-changing, interrelated and
interconnected, inorganic, biological, social and intellectual,
static patterns of value responding to Dynamic Quality.
.
.
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/
