Hm, i will honour your suggestion, and answer the question for the part that arose my suspicion. I will re-think myself on this specific matter later on the day. Probably you are wright that i'm off-scale, if i am,or think i am i will act accordingly and make my apologies to this person.
I will reconcider my position. Adrie 2010/9/5 John Carl <[email protected]> > Adrie, > > Ok first of all, you're really barking up the wrong tree, here Adrie. > Seeing ghosts in the machine. Perhaps a little projection, eh? > > Second, if Bo could write this well, he would have won a lot more friends. > Bo was stuck on a narrow range of verbiage that just didn't quite fit the > people he was addressing. But Ade is making some damn fine points here and > you should pay closer attention to the content. > > imho. > > John > > > > On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 12:36 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > get medical attention, Bodrus. > > > > 2010/9/4 <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Ade > > > > > > [email protected] wrote: > > > >Jung thinks a division between the psychic realm and that of pure > > emotion > > > lead > > > to intellectual development. > > > >And this reminded me of Bodvar Skutvik's SOL. > > > > > > 1. There's a big leap from valuing a division to suggesting it's a > whole > > > new > > > level. Especially since it demotes *any* written text to just inorganic > > > ink, and > > > the human brain to mere biology. > > > > > > 2. Since you understood the stack concept, you should realize that the > > S/O > > > division only has value, actually only is real at all, in the human > > > perspective > > > stack. The S/O division is not transposable to any other stack, so it > has > > > little > > > metaphysical value. > > > > > > Magnus > > > > > > > > > Hello Maguns, > > > 1. There is as yet no division of evolutionary related levels you > mention > > > in Zen and... > > > Zen and... does not deal with evolution. > > > The division Jung recognises is a function which performs the task of > > > multiplying symbols. If you truly believe this division > > > is invented by Quality then i can't see a problem ascribing the > emerging > > > intellectual skill to Quality itself. > > > > > > > > > 2. Lila uses a different set of opposites to that found in the previous > > > book in order to explain evolution in terms of quality. > > > It's author has stated in SODV that levels submerge subjects and > objects. > > I > > > don't think it's that easy. > > > I think i get what you are saying, but the submerged subjects and > objects > > > are a division of the stack itself. > > > So you're right and wrong at the same time. > > > I think. > > > Thank you > > > Ade > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > parser > > 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 > -- parser 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
