[Arlo]
Postmodernists and Zen Masters don't struggle with the linguistic contradiction of this. I actually am amazed anyone here does. Didn't we move past Zeno a while back? (Pun intended) But let's back up all the way to my original "postmodernist" contention that "all static patterns" are in some degree of flux, whether they change in minutes, years or over billions of years. Can anyone name ANY static pattern that is NOT in some manner of flux? Is that really rocket science to some people? That's why expressions like "more permanent" are "Koanic" and fun. They point to the incompleteness of language (of all symbolic systems). Such word games only illuminate the void, make us away of our illusions. Ron: Thats why the Zen sect, is strict in static form, so strict, that the dynamic becomes obvious. when the strict static becomes a dynamism, one has reached the understanding. In that same chapter of Lila you quoted, he, RMP, decides that the degeneracy of writing a metaphysics out weighed the degeneracy of not writing one. Did he express a FAITH that it was worthwhile? did he BELIEVE it was better to have enlightened a few at the cost of the confounding of many? 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/
