For the record, Marsha, RMP is my favorite philosopher also. Positing Royce as a brother isn't a denigration of my fave, it's a positive addition.
Likewise, fairly debating dmb on the issue isn't a drag on my time... It's a positive addition! Gives me something to contemplate today as a I build chicken coops. John On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 3:57 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi John, > > Dmb may have a James-I-tus virus, constantly pissing random acts > of Jamesness. I don't hear him explaining how RMP has made James' > philosophies better. Oh no, just endless, boring quotes from his latest > book-learning, as if it justifies something. Maybe it does within the few > classes he's taken. Other than from a historical perspective, I don't give > a bunny's butt about William James. But then dmb has all that > intellectual > competency, I shouldn't disagree with him. > > For the record, RMP, not WJ or dmb, is my favorite philosopher. > > > Marsha > > > > On Mar 9, 2010, at 4:33 PM, John Carl wrote: > > > 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 > > > > ___ > > > 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
