Mark,

'I' is a conventional designation.  

Maybe you should stick to your 'automatic writing' where you can continue to 
impress yourself.  I am not interested in your further interpretation.  


Marsha 






On Sep 16, 2011, at 10:32 PM, 118 wrote:

> Hi Marsha,
> When you start out below with "I", what are you pointing at?
> 
> Your quotes below are interesting, and I have read many similar philosophical 
> arguments.  When you complain about DMV not being consistent that surprises 
> me since you subscribe to "ever changing patterns".  I would think that you 
> would fully understand DMV based on that theory.  So, I do not know if you 
> are just being argumentative for fun, or if you are very confused about what 
> you are.
> 
> What you further describe in the first paragraph is simply the confusion that 
> living in Language brings, nothing more.  
> 
> When I have more time I will provide my interpretation of what you quote 
> below and how it all points to the existence of self.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Mark
> 
> On Sep 16, 2011, at 4:44 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Mark,
>> 
>> I experience only a flow of ever-changing, conditionally co-dependent and 
>> impermanent, static patterns of inorganic, biological, social and 
>> intellectual value in the infinite field of Dynamic Quality.  The 'self' can 
>> best be represented by the tetralemma formulation.
>> 
>> -------------   
>> 
>> "This formulation is a tool towards understanding concepts such as the 
>> not-self (or anatta) doctrine that is not handled particularly well by 
>> binary logic. So, as with every static value pattern, the notion of the 
>> ‘self’ in Buddhist philosophy is not simply considered an ‘illusion’ or an 
>> entity (as claimed by some Christian understandings of the ‘soul’) with an 
>> inherent self-existence.
>> 
>>    "That is, everything exists by being related to everything else 
>> (‘dependent co- 
>>  origination’ is the usual term), but does not exist by itself. There is no 
>> way to
>>  state this in a way that conforms to Aristotelian logic. Hence the need for 
>> the 
>>  logic of contradictory identity. The self exists by negating itself, as 
>> Nishida puts
>>   it. So, the phrase ‘the self is an illusion’ is just as much an error in 
>> Buddhist 
>>  philosophy as ‘the self exists’. The traditional Buddhist formulation is 
>> the 
>>  tetralemma:
>> 
>>                                         One cannot say that the self exists. 
>>                                   One cannot say that the self does not 
>> exist. 
>>                             One cannot say that self both exists and does 
>> not exist. 
>>                        One cannot say that the self neither exists nor does 
>> not exist.
>>                                                           (Roberts, 2004)
>> 
>> "Though he doesn’t knowingly employ the logic of the tetralemma, Pirsig does 
>> share numerous ontological beliefs with Buddhist philosophy such as 
>> Nagarjuna’s (c.300a, p.251) perception that the unconditioned (or Dynamic) 
>> is the fundamental nature of the conditioned (or static):
>> 
>>    In their ultimate nature things are devoid of conditionedness and 
>> contingency 
>>  belongs to this level. This very truth is revealed by also saying that all 
>> things 
>>  ultimately enter the indeterminate dharma or that within the heart of every 
>>  conditioned entity (as its core, as its true essence, as its very real 
>> nature) there is 
>>  the indeterminate dharma. While the one expresses the transcendence of the 
>>  ultimate reality, the other speaks of its immanence. The one says that the 
>>  ultimate reality is not an entity apart and wholly removed from the 
>> determinate, 
>>  but is the real nature of the determinate itself. 
>>                                                          (Cooper,2002)   
>> 
>>    (McWatt, A Critical Analysis of Robert Pirsig’s Metaphysics of 
>> Quality,pp.55-56)
>> 
>> -------------    
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha   
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 16, 2011, at 3:26 PM, 118 wrote:
>> 
>>> Marsha,
>>> Are you speaking in theory?  Your posts definitely suggest that you truly 
>>> believe it exists.  For example every time you use the pronoun "I".  It is 
>>> fine to deal in theories if they can be substantiated.  It is better to 
>>> post on our realities if they exist. 
>>> 
>>> I could say that nothing exists in theory and that we should drop that word 
>>> from our vocabulary since it only misdirects.  So, if the self does not 
>>> exist, there is no need to describe it other than "non-existent".  Is this 
>>> where you are at with your metaphysics?  If so, then I must caution you 
>>> that you are in a cul-de-sac, on a very long and rewarding road.  Accept 
>>> your existence as analogy and move on.  All in MHO.
>>> 
>>> If the self does not exist, then what does it?  Ball in your court, 
>>> love-love.
>>> Mark
>>> 
>>> On Sep 15, 2011, at 9:57 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Mark,
>>>> 
>>>> The self neither exists, nor doesn't exist, nor both exists & doesn't 
>>>> exist, nor neither exists and doesn't exist. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Marsha 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Sep 16, 2011, at 12:44 AM, 118 wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> OK, so you do believe in the existence of Self, my mistake.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Mark
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sep 15, 2011, at 9:20 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sep 15, 2011, at 8:45 PM, 118 wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Sure one can deny the existence of Self like Marsha does,
>>>>>>> but that is nonsense.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Mark,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I deny the existence of an independent, autonomous self. The 
>>>>>> "self" is a flow of ever-changing, conditionally co-dependent 
>>>>>> and impermanent, static patterns of inorganic, biological, social 
>>>>>> and intellectual value in the infinite field of Dynamic Quality.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 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


 
___
 

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

Reply via email to