Hi Mark, Since you insist that one must accept the underlying premise in a dilemma such as this where one must seemingly either support the notion of free will or by default be revealed to accept determinism, perhaps you can tell me: Is Quality a property of the subject or of the object? (Your answer will indicate whether you know the very first thing about the MOQ.)
Thank you in advance for your enlightening response, Steve On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 12:45 AM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, Marsha, > This is the conundrum that you put yourself into imho. > > The relegation of free-will to one of a pattern is a common mistake. > This is a primary mistake that the last Buddha made. Determinism > results in monism. That is, there is nothing new after the beginning, > and everything unfolds according to the great architect which some > call God. This is rooted in a fundamental lack of self-reliance where > responsibility is an anathema. Even Buddha saw this and attempted to > get around it. For if one is not responsible, how then does one care > for all sentient beings? If one is not responsible, then why come > back as a Bodhisattva? > > The opposite, that of free will is representative of the Conservative > premise as opposed to the Liberal. A fundamental notion of > responsibility is key to this country. However such a thing is > threatening; what if one makes a mistake? And so, the pluralistic > outlook is hidden with rhetoric. Even W. James saw the vast > difference between the monistic view and the dualistic (or more) one. > He was firmly on the side of Paganism, and paved the way for modern > philosophy as well as psychology. Carl Jung also furthered this > effort. The sense of the Archetype assumed more than one such > Archetype as opposed to a single unfolding source. > > You are sounding like Steven, who contradicts himself often. He > states that we "bring meaning with us" and then he goes no to state > that meaning is provided us through deterministic processes. This is > really the key to the argument. Quality is either provided us, or > created by us. I know which side Ham sits on, and he is the most > consistent one I know. Many throw curve balls, but his hitting is > true. While there is no such thing as a home-run in this debate, many > choose to walk to base, or get hit by a pitch rather than see the > light at the end of the field. It is in the bleachers where passion > lives, not in the expensive sealed off boxes. > > If you choose determinism, then there is no way of getting back to > free will, it is impossible. However, if you choose free-will, then > you can always change your mind. It is much easier to go from two to > one, than from one to two. As you know, according to Tao, the Tao > creates the one which creates the two. This natural order is reversed > by the thinking brain. > > Perhaps you are considering reconsidering your position? > > Cheers, > Mark 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
