Huh ? That was the other thread ... Ian
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 1:31 PM, X Acto <[email protected]> wrote: > Ian, > All I did was commend your statement > > I'll not make that mistake again > > douchebag > > -Ron > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Ian Glendinning <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sun, September 12, 2010 8:20:57 AM > Subject: Re: [MD] nut > > Ron, > Only in a wingnut kinda way. > Cool observation. > Ian > > On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 1:19 PM, X Acto <[email protected]> wrote: >> All, >> >> Who the hell is Laramie Loewen and why does he/she associate me with the FBI. >> >> WTF >> >> STOP! is this wingnut threatening any of you guys? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ---- >> From: X Acto <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Sun, September 12, 2010 8:10:48 AM >> Subject: Re: [MD] Intellectual Level >> >> Marsha, >> >> I am not trying to say you are "wrong" by any means >> >> only that your explanations contradict. >> >> I can appreciate the idea of a dynamic intellect, it's what most of us >> here are asserting. But to rest on the idea that SOM IS intellect >> only defeats that purpose. It leaves no room for improvement >> or development or expansion. It's the epitome of an absolute. >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ---- >> From: X Acto <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Sun, September 12, 2010 7:54:45 AM >> Subject: Re: [MD] Intellectual Level >> >> Bo would reply: >> the MoQ doesent make sense >> >> it's not supposed to make sense >> >> it's "out of intellect" >> >> but >> >> That leaves the door open for any and all kinds of senseless actions >> >> for justification of all senseless acts, including senseless violence. >> >> it's opening the gates of Hell and calling it Heaven. >> >> All the senseless acts of violence perpetrated against humanity was done so >> >> in the name of MoQ. Can't say it sounds very apealing to me. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ---- >> From: X Acto <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Sun, September 12, 2010 7:47:07 AM >> Subject: Re: [MD] Intellectual Level >> >> Your whole arguement denies the "many intellectual realities" position. >> It denies that objective reification is a value pattern and asserts it as >> "how >> the brain works" >> which is an objective reified assumption. >> >> see how this denies your own position >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ---- >> From: MarshaV <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Sun, September 12, 2010 7:39:59 AM >> Subject: Re: [MD] Intellectual Level >> >> >> see below... >> >> >> >> On Sep 12, 2010, at 7:30 AM, X Acto wrote: >> >>> Ok I think I get it >>> >>> You are appealing to a dynamic unpatterned intellect >>> >>> but if all thinking, as you suggest when you say that >>> "reification is how the brain works" then there is no >>> escape from it. >>> >>> transcendance is literally impossible.(while alive) or being coherent >>> in any kind of fashion. >>> >>> because it would require one to cease >>> using the brain. >>> >>> to then escape SOM we must revert to brainlessness. >>> >>> But to assert this you must constantly contradict yourself intellectually. >>> >>> the only way to a quality intellect is to stop using your brain become >> mindless >>> >>> I'd say a good portion of the world is already on that track. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ---- >>> From: MarshaV <[email protected]> >>> To: [email protected] >>> Sent: Sun, September 12, 2010 5:07:42 AM >>> Subject: Re: [MD] Intellectual Level >>> >>> >>> Greetings, >>> >>> Understanding that that the way we deal with experience is: >>> >>> >>> "... we 'seek and find, or project, a simplifying pattern to approximate > every >> >> >> >> >>> complex field ... by lumping (ignoring some distinctions as negligible) and > by >> >> >> >> >>> splitting (ignoring some relations as negligible). Both ... create discreet >>> entities useful for manipulating, predicting and controlling ... [but] may >>> impose ad hoc boundaries on what are actually densely interconnected systems >>>and >>> >>> then grant autonomous existence to the segments' (p. 108). Even the contents >>of >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> our own consciousness have to be dealt with in this way, resulting in our >>array >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> of fragmented self-concepts, and we just put up with the anomalies that > arise. >> >> >> >> >>> Buddhism, he explains, agrees that discovering entities is conventionally >>> indispensable, but attachment and aggression arise through reifying them, >>which >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> violates the principle that all things are interdependent, and all entities >>are >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> conditional approximations." >>> >>> >>> My understanding of the Intellectual Level as SOM is: >>> >>> While the MoQ represents Quality(unpatterned experience/patterned > experience.) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Intellectual Static Patterns of Value (experiences) are reified concepts and >>>the >>> >>> rules for their rational analysis and manipulation. Intellectual patterns >>> process from a subject/object conceptual framework creating false boundaries >>> that give the illusion of independence as a “thing” or an “object of >>>analysis.” >>> >>> The fourth level is a formalized subject/object level (SOM), where the >>>paramount >>> >>> demand is for rational, objective knowledge, which is free from the > corruption >> >> >> >> >>> of any subjectivity. >>> >> >> >> >> Then: >> >> "... One can then examine intellectual realities the same way he examines >> paintings in an art gallery, not with an effort to find out which one is the >> ‘real’ painting, but simply to enjoy and keep those that are of value. There >>are >> >> >> >> many sets of intellectual reality in existence and we can perceive some to > have >> more quality than others, but that we do so is, in part, the result of our >> history and current patterns of values. >> >> (RMP,LILA,Chapter 8) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ___ >> >> >> 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
