On Jan 9, 2011, at 8:38 AM, X Acto wrote: >> Ron: >> This seems to be what is being wrestled with, the arrival at the idea that >> forms >> >> are empty of material objective "permanance" which is useful in breaking a >> static >> >> conventional prejudice,but once the point has been made, what sort of meaning >> is wrought by resting on it? >> >> Philosophical discussions should begin here, not end. >> > > Marsha: > Here's another interesting quote from the MoQ Textbook where: > > "Nagarjuna and Pirsig also have a similar recognition of two types of truth; > the > ‘static’ conventional truth (sammuti-sacca) and the ‘Dynamic’ ultimate truth > (paramattha-sacca). > I am confused. My answer may contain ideas about the intellectual level, SOM > and reification, and I have been told we are not hear to learn what I think, > but > to learn what RMP thinks." > > (MoQ Textbook, p102) > > But I am confused. My response may contain ideas about the intellectual > level, > SOM and reification, and I have been told we are not hear to learn what I > think, > but to learn what RMP thinks. > > > Ron: > You are just pushing the situation when you respond like this > There is really no call for it. > > If this is a setup to rhetorically present and maintain the assertion > thatRobert Pirsig really means by using the term the intellectual > level he means SOM, then it has been determined that we are no > longer having a discussion about Robert Pirsigs Metaphysics of Quality.
Marsha: Right. Reality is whatever you think it is. You asked, and I answered; after that I cease to care. Why should I? I will abide by the wishes of the moderator. > IF this is a true intellectual inquirey then the idea of many conventional > truths may begin a discussion concerning RMP's Quality > > It's that simple. Marsha: Fine... ___ 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
