On Jun 15, 2011, at 6:09 PM, david buchanan wrote: > > dmb says: > Okay, now we're talking about the same thing.
> dmb: > But I don't think free will is bunk so much as the metaphysical entity behind > it. Marsha: What metaphysical entity woud that be? > dmb: > Same with the notion that reality itself is a series of causes and effects. > That's very metaphysical too. Marsha: Any explanation come with this bit of wonderment? > dmb: > These are the two basic metaphysical substances in subject-object > metaphysics, of course. Marsha: Which explains??? > dmb: > But, as you almost point out, the MOQ does not dispute the idea that freedom > and constraint are real. Marsha: Huh? > dmb: > The MOQ says DQ is the quality of freedom and sq is the quality of order. Marsha: Please provide the quote... Or is it bit of wisdom snatched from another context? > dmb: > Without DQ nothing could grow or change and without sq nothing can last. Marsha: If you know this, please explain how this happens. > dmb: > Without static quality, DQ degenerates into chaos. Marsha: How do you know this? Did you ever experience chaos? > dmb: > With DQ, static quality would fossilize or die of old age. Marsha: Hahahahaha... > dmb: > And it takes a living being to negotiate that balance. Marsha: What do you mean by living being? > dmb: > In that sense, freedom takes a lot of discipline. Marsha: Statically speaking, of course... Sitting for hours and hours in zazen. You know about that too. Right? > dmb: > Static patterns don't determine what we will do but they limit what we can > do. Marsha: Huh? This is almost a good as you explaining how patterns and objects differ. What nonsense... ___ 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
