----- Original Message -----
From: "118" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2011 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] The kind of will that is "free"
Hi Carl,
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Carl Thames <[email protected]>
wrote:
[Mark prev]
Hi John,
Yes, I agree. The rhetorical value is in sharing it in order to bring
about mutual agreement so that something can be shared as one. There is
great meaning in that, such as sharing a funny part of a movie.
Otherwise
the appreciation is quite isolating.
If I can jump in here: Isn't the very sharing of your personal experience
a
'sort of' attempt to subvert someone else's will? To explain, have you
noticed that when someone shares a funny part of a movie, they affect the
attitude or speech pattern of the comic? To explain, by trying to
recreate
their own experience, they are attempting to cause a similar reaction in
the
person they're relating it to. From what I understand of ZAMM, Persig
came
to the realization that truth and beauty, (and I extrapolate humor) were
not
absolute, but rather an event. That event would be dynamic, as it could
only happen in that time, in that place. If you saw the movie again, that
scene may still be funny, but it won't be funny in the same way you saw
it
the first time. Maybe my point is that the event itself IS isolating, in
that it occurs within the viewer or particiapant, since there is no way
that
two people will react in exactly the same manner. There can be mutual
agreement that the scene was funny, but you can never be sure that it was
funny to the same degree or in the exact same way.
Mark:
Yes, I agree, sharing gives the illusion of sharing. The purpose of
rhetoric is to convince or subvert someone else's will. Humor is one
of the best ways to appear to connect, there is nothing like laughing
together. As I understand Pirsig, he brings in the concept of
"Relationalism" (not to be confused with relativism). Each event
relates to another. Each moment is unique, and each memory is unique
everytime it arises within one.
We are islands due to the inability to express our minds. Telepathy
would somewhat solve this. Telepathy would be in the form of empathy
or another emotion. No words would be required since words only arise
after the feeling, if you will.
This is the problem. We apparently don't have the ability to share feelings
without putting them into words. At that point, we inject our personal
predjuces, beliefs, etc. into the telling. Culture rears up and takes over.
Then again, if you have established an empathic link, it IS possible to
share feelings without words, but that requires a lot more intimacy than
most people are capable of, or so it appears.
As such, words are simply an
elaborate binary form of communication that try to form a net with
which to relate an awareness. Any net has more space than rope.
Agreed. It can be the holes that make the net useful, though. Maybe the
holes in our communication are simply spaces in which we can grow?
Now I am not sure if reaction cannot be identical. I feel that
thoughts co-arise together between individuals. Kind of like a yawn
happening at the same time between individuals in a crowd. It is the
way these thoughts are expressed that differs. While there are many
different kinds of fear, for example, the feelings involved are pretty
much all the same. The same can be said for joy, in my opinion.
I was splitting hairs a bit, I think. Two people can express fear at the
same time, but I doubt that the fear will be expressed in the same way. For
example, if there is an intruder in your house at night, you might fear for
your life, while you wife may fear for something else entirely. Her first
thoughts may go to the children, or her personal safety. I think you get
what I'm talking about.
Freedom is something I feel and seek like minded individuals. Those who
believe in determinism do not interest me.
This begs the question of what exactly is freedom. I say, "Mark" as a
dynamic expression of my current experience, with no previous experience
or
expectation, and you reply, "What?" as the static expression of your
cultural mores. Do you see what I'm getting at here? I don't think it's
possible to be totally free of that cultural training, or we wouldn't be
able to communicate at all.
Mark:
The semantics of Freedom has gone around and around here. Freedom,
for me, is a feeling that we probably all recognize so long as we do
not analyze it. At its height it resemble weightlessness or floating
in one of those isolation chambers. It signifies something beyond the
physical attachment to all, and at its inception is Liberation. Such
Freedom is short lived since we once again compartmentalize with wordy
thoughts. However, experiences such as movie watching allows the
individual to completely lose the self and participate freely. The
same can be said for skiing down a black diamond slope, for me. It is
this direct contact with something other than the daily routine that
provides freedom to me.
To me, freedom is the ability to act, rather than re-act to a situation.
It's like getting beyond the cultural expectations and being who your truely
are, rather than playing out scripts that you've learned. Some achieve
that, most don't. There are a LOT of organizations that prey on the folks
who are unable to function without a set of guidelines. I think most
religious and political organizations are like that, as well as many civic
organizations. That's not to say that everyone involved is mindless, but I
would bet that the majority are, as Click and Clack, the Tappet Brothers
once said, "Unencumbered by the thought process." <G> It's interesting
that you achieve your sense of freedom by escaping the daily routine, (which
I call the mundane). One of my goals is to achieve a state whenin I am
present in the here and now, and totally conscious of my feelings. I've
managed it a few times, and it's interesting. Once you stop the scripts
even the routine becomes liberating.
Carl
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
