Bohm is talking about what WE believe. Lila is saying reality is whatever YOU think it is. Bohm is saying that human beings construct reality. To equate those two statements is to confuse constructivism with solipsism. Pirsig says that Lila is intellectually nowhere. And so taking her words as "the best understanding of REALITY" is intellectually nowhere. That character is a sleazy, psychotic ignoramus. She has quality, but it is decidedly NOT intellectual quality. In that scene she's being paranoid, flakey and evasive. Why in the world would anyone equate her assertions with the assertions of a great physicist-philosophers?!
In my opinion, you misread everything you get your hands on. You make a mess of everything. You misunderstand the meaning of your own evidence and use text A to defeat text B, even though both texts actually say exactly the same thing. You are a butcher and a hack. Your position can be defeated by simply quoting the dictionary or Wikipedia. Positions don't get much weaker than that. > From: [email protected] > Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2010 13:47:41 -0500 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [MD] Thus spoke Lila > > > Marsha: > Aren't those RMP's perceptions of Lila??? Are disagreeing with Lila and > David Bohm? Or what? > > > > On Dec 5, 2010, at 1:34 PM, david buchanan wrote: > > > dmb: > > "Biologically she's fine, socially she's pretty far down the scale, > > intellectually she's nowhere. But Dynamically . . . Ah! That's the one > > towatch." > > > On Dec 5, 2010, at 1:02 PM, MarshaV wrote: > > >> Marsha: > >> I still think the best understanding of REALITY is found in Lila's > >> words(LILA, Chapter 14): "...I'm whatever your questions turn me into. You > >> don't see that. It's your questions that make me who I am. If you think I'm > >> an angel then that's what I am. If you think I'm a whore then that's what I > >> am. I'm whatever you think. And if you change your mind about me then I > >> change too. So whatever Richard tells you, it's true. There's no way he can > >> lie about me." - Reality is whatever you think it is (your patterns), > >> there's no way you can lie about it, and if you change your understanding > >> of > >> reality, then reality changes too. > >> > >> > >> Here are something by David Bohm that says the same thing: > >> > >> "Reality is what we take to be true. What we take to be true is what we > >> believe. What we believe is based upon our perceptions. What we perceive > >> depends upon what we look for. What we look for depends on what we think. > >> What we think depends on what we perceive. What we perceive determines > >> what we believe. What we believe determines what we take to be true. What > >> we take to be true is our reality." > >> > >> (Mathieu Ricard & Trinh Xuan Thuan, 'The Quantum and the Lotus: A > >> Journey to the Frontiers Where Science and Buddhism Meet',p.121) > >> > >> > > > > > ___ > > > 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
