On Aug 17, 2011, at 12:48 PM, Arlo Bensinger wrote:
> [Marsha]
> 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:
>
> [Arlo]
> This isn't quite what I meant, and I don't think I said the "self" is an
> intellectual pattern of value. I said it is a pattern of value (what else is
> there, other than DQ?), and of course with a MOQ a higher pattern ipso facto
> consists of the lower patterns that support it.
>
> What I'd say is that your "description" of "self" is an intellectual pattern
> of value, but like other descriptions can point outside the intellectual
> level. For example, I could define the "self" as the "human body", in which
> case the "intellectual pattern of value" (which is the definition) points to
> a biological pattern of value (the human body).
>
> And, yes, I think we use the self pattern of value to make sense of
> inorganic, biological, social and intellectual activity. In some contexts it
> is useful to think of the "self" as bounded by the biological body ("You
> stepped on my foot", for example), while at other times we dismiss this (when
> I had my appendix removed, I didn't feel as if any part of "my self" was
> removed). When a skydiver is falling out of an airplane suddenly the "self"
> as rooted in inorganic patterns is intensely salient (gravity matters).
>
Marsha:
RMP has called an autonomous self is an illusion, In Lila he states: "This
self-appointed little editor of reality is just an impossible fiction that
collapses the moment one examines it." And in Lila's Child he states that the
MoQ "denies any existence of a “self” that is independent of inorganic,
biological, social or intellectual patterns. There is no “self” that contains
these patterns." Statically, conventionally, and for that matter
linguistically, from any of those point-of-view, it is illusory. Call it
remnants of the subject-object point-of-view if you like.
At least that is how I understand it. I'm not sure how far apart are our
views.
___
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
