Greetings John,
My house guest left this morning. It was a nice visit, but the quiet now seems lovely. - What is Williston, North Dakota like? Any photos? On May 29, 2011, at 7:00 PM, John Carl wrote: > > > Marsha: > > You can present your argument again, but in the past it didn't resonate > > as correct to my experience. I seem to remember you trying to link the > > I-level to art. > > > John: > > > Yes. That I have done and will do. 'Tis the key to the whole shootin' > match, imo. the self-reflection of consciousness through the mechanism of > the bifurcated brain. The key to self realization is a self with two > aspects which can reflect each other and thus intellectually know. Marsha: I don't understand your explanation, and it doesn't seem to be MoQ based. Why bifurcation? > > Marsha: > > RMP has stated that art is a mixture of all four levels with > > Dynamic Quality. That works for me. > > > > John: > > > Art is always a realization. We interpret that patterning we deem artistic, > and it's as high-order processing as any merely intellectual enterprise. At > the roots, rationality is an art. A certain aesthetic dictated the > decisions of logic, consistency and coherence that pleased people. Liking > something because its popular is society's training, but creating and > recognizing an aesthetic experience because it speaks to us of something > inside, that I term 4th level experience. It's more than intellect can > encapsulate, which is why I don't like the term "intellectual" for the 4th > level and feel the 4th level should explicitly be known as a dualistic level > - a romantic/classic fusion of art and science together, in the same room, > sharing the same bed. That's my opinion. Marsha: Again, I don't really understand your explanation. I do, though, like the talk of fusion and sharing the same bed. Very romantic... > > Marsha: > > > Maybe you understand it related > > to the intellectual level because your art is words. My definition of the > > Intellectual Level as being made up of som patterns seems best from > > my point-of-view, while art is all levels with the spontaneous dynamic > > guiding the way. > > > John: > > > Well, as to my art being words... I'll agree to an extent. It's what I care > about most deeply of all expression. On many levels, true. But that's my > expression. My appreciation knows no such boundaries. Music, images and > feelings bound up with both, intertwined with words and concepts, impact my > life and my meanings, even when I don't express myself along those lines > well, I hear and understand on those lines just fine and I think > appreciation makes us just as much "artistic" as does craft and ability. > > > But I admit the freedom to see things our own way is fundamental. For > instance, I was walking down the street today and I saw two squirrels, > running round and round and round a tree and I thought to myself, "how do > they know who is chasing who?, and whether they are circling the tree, or is > the tree encircling them?" And then they stopped running and one of them > started humping the other and I knew, which one was chasing which. And I > thought to myself, if W. James had seen TWO squirrels, he might have come up > with a better metaphysics. Marsha: Who was on top? Awww, poor squirrels probably don't get much choice. ;-) ___ 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
