John, I look forward to a debate between you and Dave. It will be interesting I'm sure. I can image that comparing and contrasting Royce & James with the RMP will be educating.
Marsha On Mar 10, 2010, at 12:36 PM, John Carl wrote: > 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 ___ 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
