Hi All, I have been reading your posts on this subject, and have learned some. It has been suggested that I do not understand MOQ, which is fine if there is a single understanding of it. I can always learn more of the rules of such a subject.
What I am reading in posts is the description of consciousness in the third person. That is, the presence of consciousness as a phenomenon. What my post last week was referring to was the "enigmatic self-consciousness" that Bodvar refers to below. I have come to understand that such consciousness does not have any physical attributes, in fact it does not exist. It is, however, fed by such things as Value. As I am deciphering Ham's attempts at explaining his ontology, I find certain meaning. However, while I can put consciousness into a semantic box, I still cannot fathom why it is mine. It is that personal presence that requires some metaphysical feedback. In my readings on Dzogchen, I have been instructed not to use logic... I have found the term "open non-appropriative awareness" to be somewhat useful. Does this term fit in with your ontology Ham? Thanks, Willblake2 On Aug 17, 2009, at 11:38:27 PM, [email protected] wrote: I suspect it is the more enigmatic "self-consciousness" which is at the stake, but Pirsig's above seems not to address that, rather to demonstrate how Quality is necessary for anything to be perceived at all, the point refined in the "cutting edge of time" argument. 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/
