Sorry marsha, I wasn't talking about your panties, it was a snide aside aimed at dmb.
Willam Jame's Varieties is more his baliwick, after all. I've actually never had Jalapeno Ice Cream, but I have heard it's good. On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 1:07 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Greetings, > > My panties in a bunch? I don't think so. I just posted what I thought to > be > the MoQ's point-of-view on theism, and what I perceived to be a problem > arguing theism as the same as religion. I'm all in favor of a variety of > religious experiences, but non attributed to any type of other supernatural > being/s. > > Mixed with some cocoa beans, I bet hot, spicy Jalapeno peppers in > ice cream would be wonderful. I'd try it. > > > Marsha > > > > > > > On Mar 9, 2010, at 3:50 PM, John Carl wrote: > > > I hear ya, Marsha. Jalapeno Ice Cream isn't your taste but you won't > knock > > the spoon outta somebody else's mouth. > > > > Fair enough. > > > > I'm only slightly curious why a system which extolls "Varieties" of > > Religious Experience would get its panties all in a twist in the first > > place, but hey. That's just me and my Jalapeno flavored world view. > > > > Yours, > > > > John > > > > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:18 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> JC, > >> > >> I disagree with you, but I'm not trying to change your mind. I think > the > >> concept > >> chocked full of harmful vibes, but by all means go for it. Let the show > >> begin. > >> I'll wander through the stadium getting rich selling moon pie. > >> > >> Love you, > >> Marsha > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mar 9, 2010, at 11:49 AM, John Carl wrote: > >> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> And I think the use of the term "god" much more degrading because of > the > >>>> commonly acknowledged definitions, connotations and history. I think > >> RMP > >>>> chose the most appropriate label. Stripping the word "god" of all the > >>>> garbage > >>>> would be near impossible, imho. > >>>> > >>>> > >>> I dunno Marsha. It has been tried before. There seems to me to be a > >>> central problem in human history that when you throw out "God", you > throw > >>> out values. That's the way it's been. The Russian experiment > (remember > >> the > >>> "godless commies?") didn't work out so well and historically, the use > of > >> the > >>> term has served the evolution of society so that evidently those > >> societies > >>> that use the term do better than the societies that don't. I feel > rather > >>> than tossing it out, the MoQ should analyze. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> That's not the same thing as true atheism. Which is more along the > >> lines > >>>>> Krimel advocated with the world and all that is being the product of > >>>> random > >>>>> chance, with no positive force behind any of it. No matter what you > >> call > >>>>> it. > >>>> > >>>> Here's the definition of atheism I use: Atheists are people who > believe > >>>> that god > >>>> or gods (or other supernatural beings) are man-made constructs, myths > >> and > >>>> legends or who believe that these concepts are not meaningful. If > >> Krimel > >>>> has > >>>> a more esoteric, sophisticated definition that's fine but it would > seem > >> to > >>>> narrow > >>>> the discussion to only those individuals who share his definition. > >>>> > >>>> > >>> Ok Marsha. Let's look at this carefully. "man-made constructs" - what > >>> isn't? Even to use the term implies a supernatural entity, otherwise > >> "man" > >>> - made is meaningless. > >>> > >>> Unless you meant gender-wise and you prefer "woman-made constructs". > >>> > >>> It's like gav pointed out about "Freedom" is also a man-made construct, > >> but > >>> in the MoQ, even subjective patterns have meaning AS patterns of value. > >>> Since people have gone to war repeatedly over such intellectual > >> constructs, > >>> I fail to see how defining them as "meaningless" is helpful in > analyzing > >>> them properly. > >>> > >>> > >>>>> I agree that one does not need faith to perceive Quality, whereas it > >> does > >>>>> take a sort of faith to perceive God. Just one more way that Quality > >> and > >>>>> God are differing concepts. I guess the purest way I can make the > >>>>> distinction is that you can ask if God is any good, but you can't > >> really > >>>> ask > >>>>> if Quality is any good. God is measured by Quality, not the other > way > >>>>> around. > >>>>> > >>>>> Does that make sense? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Perfect sense. So what is benefit of holding on to the concept of > God? > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> Communication with 95% of US Population, for one. Discourse with most > of > >>> written history, for another. Those two alone hold enough benefit to > >> tempt > >>> me to go all, "duh!" on you. > >>> > >>> But I won't because I'm too respectful. > >>> > >>> Quality doesn't obviate God. Quality tames "God". The comparison with > >> SOM > >>> is exactly apt - Quality doesn't obviate S/O. Quality tames S/O. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> John the lion-tamer, > >>> 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/md/archives.html > >> > >> > >> > >> ___ > >> > >> > >> 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/md/archives.html > >> > > 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/md/archives.html > > > > ___ > > > 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/md/archives.html > 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/md/archives.html
