Mornin' Marsha,

>
> Are you somewhere saying that I have something misinterpreted, because
> if you think so may I can clarify.
>
>

My specific point of contention, is that "emptiness = Quality" is a view, a
metaphysical view, refuted by the video you post.  Wallace specifically
terms it "foolish person's conclusion".  Now, does this mean I'm calling you
a fool?

Yes!

But I make a fool of myself as well, to communicate to one and all, that we
are all fools.  Not all fools equally, but equally all fools.  And the fool
that understands her foolishness is wise.  And for me to have enough faith
in your wisdom, to point out your foolishness to you, then I guess I'm not
calling you a fool, I'm calling you wise.

So... No!

Another interesting part of that video, was the way he mentioned in his task
of interpreting the physicist for the Dalai Lama, was that at the end of the
day, the physicist reports going home and reifying his wife and kids, even
though he knows they don't actually exist, objectively speaking.  In other
words, reification is even more inevitable than drinking and picking up bar
lades, and using "it's a reification" as argumentative refutation is no more
adequate an argument than saying "it's only an analogy, ya know."   I mean
really.  duh.  Everything is.


John Laughing Fool





>
>
> On Oct 7, 2010, at 12:23 PM, John Carl wrote:
>
> > Marsha, listen to the last part again. That last couple of minutes.
> I've
> > transcribed it for others who can't be bothered to wade through 8 or so
> > minutes of excellent rhetoric"
> >
> > "The two radical poles- that which is absolutely objective  and that
> which
> > absolutely subjective, are null sets, they're equally empty.  Now where
> does
> > that leave us? The foolish person says 'I get it -  Nothing exists-
> Nihilism
> > - foolishness.  What I want to do, metaphorically, is take out a little
> > knife and pffft - (pop their balloon).  I want to bring them back.  Yes,
> > absolutel objectivity and absolute subjectivity - empty.    So where is
> > reality to be found? The entanglement between."
> >
> > There is your synonym for Quality, my dear: The Entanglement Between.
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 9:01 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I think it is acceptable within the MoQ to consider Emptiness equivalent
> to
> >> Quaiity...
> >>
> >>
> >> Emptiness & Quantum Mechanics  (8 minutes)
> >>              by B. Alan Wallace
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> http://web.me.com/ksnowsb108/B._Alan_Wallace_Podcasts/Podcast/Entries/2009/2/7_Emptiness_%26_Quantum_Mechanics.html
> >>
> >>
> >> Bio:  Dr. Wallace, a scholar and practitioner of Buddhism since 1970,
> has
> >> taught Buddhist theory and meditation worldwide since 1976. Having
> devoted
> >> fourteen years to training as a Tibetan Buddhist monk, ordained by H. H.
> the
> >> Dalai Lama, he went on to earn an undergraduate degree in physics and
> the
> >> philosophy of science at Amherst College and a doctorate in religious
> >> studies at Stanford.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >>
> >>
> >> 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

Reply via email to