Hi JoHn, > On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Mary <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi John & all, > > > > Rudimentary Emotions must have begun at the Biological Level. > > Emotions do not exist without an ego to feel them. > > > > > Is the ego a biological creation or a socially created pattern? > Because I > put forth that it is only socially derived and created. > [Mary Replies] If by socially derived you mean at the Social Level, I would ask you to clarify that. Do dogs, for instance, have a Social Level? I'm pretty sure my dog has an ego, the chickens, horses, and goats I used to have did too. > > > > Ego developed as a self-preservation mechanism at the Biological > Level. > > If you lacked an ego, you would not value your own continued > existence. > > If you did not value your own continued existence, you would not > defend > > yourself, so you wouldn't survive, would you? > > > > > > If you had no conception of self to defend, you would not know how to > defend > it. Therefore, before the proper attention to the biological > exingencies of > existence can be maintained, the boundaries of self vs. other must be > created or defined. > [Mary Replies] Yes. The concept of ego is very old.
> There are human bodies we can maintain at a functional level, but we > deem > the "self" to be absent. We call them "brain dead", but what we really > mean > is that we can no longer interact with them on any level, and thus > since > they have zero social meaning, they must not be really alive. > > This shows that sense of self is a social construct. Emotions are > social > intelligence. > > [Mary Replies] I'm not clear how it shows that. > > > > Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Which of these 2 emotions > were > > first? Lust or Fear? > > > Fear, I'm sure. We value biological integrity long before we crave > biological procreativity. > > > > > Hmmm, kind of depends on your mechanism for > > procreation, doesn't it. If you replicate by basic cell division, > you > > wouldn't need lust, so I guess it was fear. I would say that they > are the > > only 2 that are necessary at the Biological Level. Get any fancier > and you > > are talking rudimentary Social Level (cooperation, empathy, respect > and > > such). > > > > So, I guess the ego was the big driver through both the biological > and > > social levels. Didn't stop there, though, did it? The Ego drives > the > > intellectual Level too. I am discrete. I am me and everything else > is > > "other". I Need that science to study that "other stuff". There's > me (the > > subject) and you and particle physics (my objects). Can't be any > other way > > because I am my ego. Subject-Object Metaphysics rules! > > > > > I believe tho that this ego problem is tameable with realization. > [Mary Replies] I believe this ego problem is tamable with the MoQ. Instead of a subject-object divide there is a static-dynamic one. > Ever heard of realization Mary? > [Mary Replies] hehehe! > For I realize that since my self cannot exist without a relational > matrix, > and I also realize my self does exist, I can deduce metaphysically a > relational matrix beyond my narrow sense of self and hey. As long as I > can > metaphysically deduce my existence, (and yours!) I'm happy. > [Mary Replies] If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him. > And it is peace of mind which determines the completion of the > rotisserie. > > John 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
