On Apr 21, 2010, at 5:52 AM, Andre Broersen wrote:
Marsha to Andre: > > I would rather see the MoQ relating to Quantum Physics towards an > enlightened Philosophy of Science than looking back to James, Northrop and > etc., but that would take hard work, not just regurgitation. What the Buddhist > discovered by looking inward seems to be reflected by the physicists looking > outward. The MoQ is the bridge between the outer intellect of the West and the > inner insights of the East; both have used a 'scientific method' and rationality. > The SODV was the way to go, imho. > > Andre: > '...outer intellect...and...inner insights...??? > > Marsha: > To restate: > What was Buddha doing sitting under that Bo Tree? My guess he was > meditating and using his intellect (rationality& scientific observation) to > study the mind. The big difference seems to be that while the West > studied an external reality, the East studied the internal reality. > > Andre: > I didn't realise your question was rhetorical Marsha. Just clarify this next > time so I won't bother. > Andre, I meant no disrespect. I was just reaffirming my conventional opinion. I suppose to have an opinion is a lack of humility. Ultimately, though, I do know that I know nothing. Been thinking about death. First I had a dream of death and I was terrified. Next I had a dream where I drank hemlock and asked for more. This morning it dawned on me that death is a static pattern of value; something happens, but ultimately we know not what. Same with birth... By 'outer intellect' I meant the West's pragmatic science. By 'inner insight' I meant the two truths: conventional reality and Ultimate Reality, or as presented in the MoQ: static quality and Dynamic Quality. I care. Marsha 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
