On Dec 1, 2010, at 4:51 PM, 118 wrote: > Hi Marsha, > I think you are being a little confusing. Your terms seem to contradict. I > know you understand what you are talking about, but the expression leaves on > mystified. Some comments below on your reply to Tim. > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:17 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> [Tim] > > THe collection is not casual; there is some >>> not-so-changing consistency through it all. >> >> Marsha: >> Collection - many - one's static value history. >> >> Please described that not-so-changing consistency? I have never >> found it such. >> >> [Mark] > I know you are trying to press a point here Marsha, but as you describe it, > we could not function. We tie things together, we have to. Such tying is > real, it's what we do.
Marsha: We? What is the we but a process? > [Mark] > Our bodies seem the same from moment to moment. Marsha: Seems? It may seem the same, but it the same? > [Mark] > Every moment cannot be a blank slate. Marsha: Every moment cannot be a blank slate. > [Mark] > So memory creates not-so-everchanging consistency. Marsha: How does memory create anything? > [Mark] > If memory is not real, then we have a problem with the definition > of real. Marsha: I never uttered the word 'real'. > [Mark] > Are you a different person every moment? Marsha: I've never be aware of a sameness. > [Mark] > I know the I does not exist if you don't want it to, but it sure is > useful. In terms of dismissing SOM in an objective way, we can either say > that we do not exist, or we are everything. Both work and I prefer the > latter (at least today). Marsha: I exist as a movement of ever-changing, interdependent, impermanent static/dynamic value. >>> [Tim] >>> there is still a little nit that I picked before, regarding 'flowing': >>> that this might be too restrictive a term; But I think this is off topic >>> now. >> >> Marsha: >> Flowing is an analogy. What word do you prefer. >> > > [Mark] > How about interchanging? A stream has to flow past something, what is that > something? Marsha: I like the word 'flow' because it is poetic. Interchanging within the net of jewels? >>> [Tim] >>> also, while I'm at it, I wonder why you have both 'ever-changing' and >>> 'impermanent', specifically, why do you insist on the latter? >> >> Marsha: >> A pattern event is always different, from individual to individual, across >> time, and within the DQ field. Granted time and space and change are >> givens, but I don't know how to talk without assuming them. I suppose >> that's the difficulty with discussing superposition and entanglement too, >> The concepts are beyond our metaphysical assumptions and linguistic >> rules. And why I get frustrated speaking of unpatterned experiences. >> >> Impermanent because an experience/event has a beginning, a middle >> and an end. >> > > [Mark] > I think the question was one about redundancy. Ever changing requires > impermanency. Marsha: It may be redundant, but I like sometimes to be redundant. I think you do too. > [Mark] > If you are stating that an experience is finite, when does it begin, and when > does it end? Marsha: I am not stating that an experience is finite. > [Mark] > Are we talking about birth and death, or something more fundamental? Marsha: I am not talking about birth and death, or anything more fundamental? > [Mark] > Like you say, the concept of ever-changing requires some solid reference to > measure against. If there is no solid reference, we cannot conclude that > things are ever-changing. We can consider ever-changing to be static, but > if ever-changing changes, will it not become permanent? This is where your > words are confusing. Marsha: Hmmmm. An static value event will change with the change of all other static value events. >> [Tim] >>> Anyway, to hint at my answer, even if I don't end up 'having a problem' >>> with your description, I think I will prefer one that mentions 'choice' >>> and 'will', as I see these as the two most vital prerogatives of the >>> 'I'. Further, it is not the static patterns that choose and will, nor >>> is it so much the 'collection'... where do choice and will come from in >>> your description? >> >> [Marsha] > >> Choice? Like in freewill? Do you want choice in every event? Do you >> want to choose when to breath? What category of choice do you prefer >> to make? How many possible mental events happen in a minute? >> >> For me, awareness allows influencing an event. >> > > [Mark] > Either you allow choice at every event, or you allow no choice. There > cannot be some things that contain choice and others that don't. If there > is, where does this magic line appear? If you are speaking of conscious > choice, what is it that is making that choice? Where is your chooser? Marsha: I allow influence through awareness. >>> And about what you opposed your description with (in connection with >>> your description): mu. >> >> Nothing to say in opposition to someone's mu. These are not easy >> issues. >> > > [Mark] > Mu Marsha: In the words of Hathor, "moo." ___ 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
