Ron, Why don't you read your (MD) Rant of Friday, July 17, 2009 9:00 AM, and analyze it
Marsha -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of X Acto Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 7:37 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] What a wonderful world What is foolish, I believe, is only applying "not this, not that" to those ideas you do not like. What I do not like is when you ask for an explaination and a convincing arguement of a point of view you do not agree with from the start, then condemn those who take up your challenge as alpha males trying to brainwash you into following that point of view. You make "this or that " choices all the time, you choose "this or that" when you get out of bed in the morning, use the bathroom, eat, put on cloths, paint, read, contribute on the discuss. "not this not that" does not seem to pertain to those ideas you like. you most certainly seem to choose MoQ, athieism,buddhism, painting and contributing to the discuss. What I do think is foolish is using "not this, not that" as a philosphical tool used in active honost inquirey, for it is anything but an honost inquirey it is a dismissal of it and a cementing of existing prejudices. You use it as a fundementalist uses the devil. No thing is holy Marsha all things are holy that includes those things you like and dislike thats about all I have to say that and this "alpha male" isn't playing fetch for your amusement any longer. I refuse to participate in the cementing of your prejudices ----- Original Message ---- From: MarshaV <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2009 2:38:19 PM Subject: Re: [MD] What a wonderful world Andre, Interesting thing, I am not Lao Tsu, nor ever claimed to be someone like him. I do claim, though, no matter what I investigate it turns out to be not this, not that. If I seem foolish for saying so, than maybe I am foolish. Marsha -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andre Broersen Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 12:55 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] What a wonderful world Marsha to Andre:If the wave is dynamic, and the particle static, the wave/particle duality is still an analogy. Maybe to understand all in analogy (a kind of death to intellectual patterns) is to be open and allow for the possibility of intuition. Andre: Hi Marsha, catching up a bit after my wonderful holiday in the land of Eire. In this case I put Reanney's waves ( from 'Music of the Mind') as similar to the undifferentiated continuum (the waves)...Quality from which we 'abstract' the 'particles' i.e our evolution has developed sensitivity to/ awareness of the anorganic, and organic abstractions/perceptions.(SOM's stronghold) When we 'understand/comprehend something we 'resonate, with their waves ( in Pirsig's ZMM parlance... 'waves of crystallization' occur ). Some call this an 'epiphany', some a mystical experience when something that has 'eluded' you for a long time suddenly 'gells' it fits, it resonates...it has 'returned to the wave from which it was abstracted in particle form and now resonates as 'enlightenment' in wave form...and you are aware of this!!!it has 'expanded' your consciousness. And yes, I think I agree with you...it remains ( to communicate) an analogy...but for yourself!!!...at the (what we call intuitive level) you know better. As Lao Tsu said: those who do not know, talk, those who know do not talk. Pirsig (ZMM) does talk about transcending the intellectual level...reaching a broader , more inclusive level of understanding...a higher level of 'consciousness' so I make no bones about using these terms.They are central to an understanding of the MoQ. Some call it mystical but as Bodvar has suggested this is a typical SOM term/ interpretation (and there is nothing subjective (in a derogatory 'just' way) about mystical experiences. They have occured too often with too many people...the wave experiences are real. The re- connections with the All or whatever you want to call it. It suggests the complementarity of the wave/particle Bohm was talking about. Pirsig has given expression to this in his MoQ but I admit readily that I do not completely understand (read: resonate) with this simply because I am still grappling with parts of the MoQ. (especially as explained by other MD'ers) I hope I am making some sense and do not disappoint Bodvar too much in the process otherwise I'll be SOM doomed forever!! Thanks for you kind words Marsha and not forgetting Ron!!( you are correct Ron, we must be precise). For what it is worth Andre 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/ 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/
