I'm also comfortable with that Marsha ... the ineffability, beyond the S/O intellectual linguistic process.
So if anything the MOQ separation perspective is on another layer / level - maybe in a different "dimension". I've suggested that to Bo before. (What makes me nervous about Bo's take is that it is maybe seen as the fundamental "gods-eye" view. But I'm cool with it being the best available level from which we have a viewpoint.) Regards Ian On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 10:40 AM, MarshaV<[email protected]> wrote: > > Greetings Ian, > > Hmmm. I've mentioned this is more difficult because explaining it is an > intellectual process, especially using a s/o language like English, and it > is a struggle to find suitable words. It is like that figure of the > faces/2vases image, where suddenly there it is!!! It's one minute self and > objects, the next it's ever-changing, interconnected process/experience. > Not just different words like the previous sentence, but a very different > experience. I really am frightened to talk about this. I am not an > enlightened one, but a novice in the newest sense of the word. It is sips > of unpatterned experience. God, and I can just hear Krimel's response > 'AwGee!'. > > > Marsha > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ian Glendinning > Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 4:12 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [MD] Uncertainty > > Hi Marsha, > > You said >> >> As far as what is beyond all patterns, DQ or Ultimate Reality? I am quite >> comfortable with indivisible, undefinable and unknowable, and the >> possibility of the creation of a better pattern always available. >> > I say. Me too. (Effectively defining "real" as nothing that exists in > itself other than that ultimate reality.) > > I also agree with "most" of what Bo says (leaving science aside for > now), so I would like to ask you to clarify one point where you also > agree with him. You are focussing on the patterns and not the > evolutionary aspects, although we agree the social to intellectual (as > S/O) split arose with the Greeks, and you said >> >> Intellectual Level being the subject/object level, and the MoQ being a > major >> separation with the Intellectual Level representing a new level, a new >> perspective. >> > This is the crux of where I have difficulty with Bo's SOL. > You use the word "level" four times, but you say "the MoQ being a > major separation", and then say "a new perspective". > > Where is this separation / perspective ? In what ? Of what ? > Perhaps you could just elaborate / explain your "separation" point a > little further. (with or without using the words level and/or pattern) > > Regards > Ian > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 9:35 AM, MarshaV<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Mati, Ham, >> >> I am flipping out with happiness, > 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/
