Arlo,
While the way discussion has been framed, the 'self' does seem to be an
intellectual static pattern of value. But I'd like to remind you that within
the MoQ the self is also a collection of organic, biological, social and
intellectual static patterns of value:
Annotation 29: “The MOQ, as I understand it, denies any existence of “self”
that is independent of inorganic, biological, social or intellectual patterns.
There is no “self” that contains these patterns. These patterns contain the
self. This denial agrees with both religious mysticism and scientific
knowledge. In Zen, there is reference to “big self” and “small self.” Small
self is the patterns. Big self is Dynamic Quality."
(RMP, Lila’s Child)
So, my definition of the self within the MoQ is 'self' is a flow of
ever-changing, conditionally co-dependent and impermanent, static patterns of
inorganic, biological, social and intellectual value in a field of Dynamic
Quality. And that matches my experience.
Marsha
On Aug 17, 2011, at 11:53 AM, MarshaV wrote:
>
> On Aug 17, 2011, at 11:25 AM, Arlo Bensinger wrote:
>
>> [Marsha]
>> Yes, but Ms. Albahari's investigation is whether the 'sense of self' does,
>> in fact, reflect a real 'self'. A far more important investigation consider
>> that RMP rejects an autonomous self.
>>
>> [Arlo]
>> You keep repeating this, Marsha, and I don't know why. I am not interested
>> in the "real/illusion" dichotomy of existential existence. I am interested
>> in how these patterns provide value within a MOQ. And within a MOQ there are
>> no existents/illusions, there are only patterns of value.
>
> Marsha:
> I included the Ms. Albahari reference only because you mistakenly labeled
> Ian's comments as mine. I added my comment to which Ian had posted his reply
> to supply context.
>
>
>> [Arlo]
>> "Illusions" only appear in response to holding something as being
>> existentially real. For example, the intellectual pattern of value called
>> "free will" fosters the belief that the "self" is an existential existant.
>> This is an illusion created by this pattern.
>
> Okay. The MoQ uses the term static quality, while Buddhism calls it
> conventional reality. In both 'free will' is based is provisional.
>
>> [Arlo]
>> Yes, Pirsig (and I) reject "autonomous selves", but this is just another way
>> of saying "rejects S/O". Okay. Done. So the "self" is not an autonomous
>> agent (as it is within S/O), but it IS a pattern of value.
>
> Marsha:
> Good for you. I want to go deeper that an intellectual acknowledgement.
>
>
>
>
>
> Marsha
> 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
___
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
