Mark, Grrrrr to you.
Was your presenting the little English translation of the Zen poem an exception to your rule because what you present is special? Or was it a kind of 'do what I say and not what I do' moment? Marsha On Aug 21, 2011, at 2:13 PM, 118 wrote: > BZZZZ > > Is that worth one of your dangling fish that I jump through hoops for? > > Mark > > On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 10:29 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> You bet it's worth a peanut! >> >> >> How about: >> >> There once was a bee that sat on a wall, >> it said bzzzz, and that is all. >> >> >> >> Marsha >> >> >> On Aug 21, 2011, at 1:09 PM, 118 wrote: >> >>> Marsha, >>> >>> There was a young man who said tho' >>> It seems that I know that I know >>> What I would like to see >>> Is the "I" that knows me >>> When I know that I know that I know >>> >>> Zen >>> >>> That is worth at least a peanut >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 10:05 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Mark, >>>> >>>> Would you like another potato chip? >>>> >>>> >>>> Marsha >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Aug 21, 2011, at 12:03 PM, 118 wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Joe, Ham, Marsha, perhaps Ron, Arlo and whomever else is stuck in >>>>> this two dimensional web, >>>>> >>>>> Let's stick to logic for a second, for this is how philosophy works. >>>>> Let's not get caught up in semantic misdirection and consider what we >>>>> can logically create. >>>>> >>>>> When Joe speaks of emotions, he gets caught up in a self-referential >>>>> circle. He defines emotions as indefinable. Why are they >>>>> indefinable? Because they are emotions! I am not sure how far this >>>>> logic will take one. Logic is structure, it is something we build on >>>>> assumptions. Such structures can stretch to the stars, or down to the >>>>> atom. We always begin in the middle of these. >>>>> >>>>> Emotions, or as Ham prefers, pre-Rational sentiments, create >>>>> definitions. So we logically begin with "that which creates >>>>> definitions". Our assumption is therefore that there is something >>>>> which results in definitions and start the logical process. We can >>>>> call this assumption anything we like. >>>>> >>>>> From this assumption, we can logically work our way up into high level >>>>> math, or down into mystical realities. We can define such results as >>>>> Illusions, Delusions, Fantasy, Creativity, Evolution, Devolution, etc. >>>>> Let us assume that all these things are what we have. So I will >>>>> simplify all those words into one: Reality. Therefore in the first >>>>> instance, we have "that which creates Reality". I am of course >>>>> referring to our individual realities, or as Ham would state, our >>>>> "sensibilities". >>>>> >>>>> While I enjoy reading Ham's reflections on what he sees, I do not >>>>> agree with his assumption that "man is the measure of all things". I >>>>> would say that "all things are the measure of man". By this, I mean >>>>> that man operates within a world that is provided him. Man's >>>>> measurements are simply a byproduct of existing measurements. Man >>>>> harnesses these things and uses them for his own good. He cannot >>>>> create them. >>>>> >>>>> I am not sure who started this thread, but the nature of the subject >>>>> title seems to point to Marsha. The "agent" I would assume is similar >>>>> to Ham's agent. I did not have the time to read the quotes that >>>>> Marsha provided since I am more interested in personal contributions, >>>>> and I do not need to read another interpretation of the Diamond Sutra >>>>> written in English. I will say, however, that I disagree that the >>>>> Self can create thoughts or action. I therefore prefer Ham's >>>>> "witness". If somebody can demonstrate to me a logical or causal >>>>> connection between the Self (our unique personal awareness), and >>>>> thoughts (the action of the brain), I would most appreciate it. For >>>>> example, what is the mechanism by which the Self creates thoughts? >>>>> Where does this First Action lie? >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, I enjoy the posts. >>>>> >>>>> 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 >>>> >>> 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 >> > 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
