On Apr 30, 2010, at 10:45 AM, Andre Broersen wrote: > Marsha to Horse ; > > I still understand the Intellectual Level to represent a formalized > subject/object (SOM) manipulation of abstract symbols, whether > they are concepts such as justice, neutrinos, or energy. > > Andre: > Direct experience formalizes nothing Marsha.
I haven't the slightest idea what you're getting at with this sentence. > The MOQ invites the analysis of your own experience. Remember in ZMM the > relationship between the mechanic and the motorcycle? The MoQ is both 1.) a intellectual pattern explained by ZMM and LILA, and 2. a designation for Reality = Quality. > The subject here and the motorcycle there and never the twain shall meet ( in > SOM!!!). Yes, the subject/object thinking is dualistic, and SOM is a formalized representation of subject/object thinking. > The MOQ allows you a different, more empirically real experience whereby the > 'distance' between subject and object, in the direct experience is nullified. > The gap is maintained by Bodvar's SOL and this view is detrimental to the MOQ. An understanding of Reality = Quality = (unpatterned experience & patterned experience). I don't think you understand Bo's point-of-view enough to say that it is a detriment to the MoQ. I am much more interested in the nature of all patterns, than the levesl, and not so much in your rantings. > Christ, I thought you had learned something from Pirsig, James, Krishnamurti, > Najarguna, Buddhism etc,etc!...and your own meditative practices. What you think I've learned is not very important to me. > The farther you go away from DQ the more divisions you'll encounter. Here, I agree with you. 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
