Hi Marsha, What we know is what we create. If I do not know then I can not create. The metaphysical split of Quality is fine with me as a presentation, it is a personal relationship with what one sees as other. I am simply questioning whether to see everything as patterns is a sufficient relationship.
I can not "tell" you the way things "are", if that is what you are asking. I can only present other doors for understanding. That is what my posts to you are about. I have been trying to do so through rhetoric, but you will not be aware of them until you open the doors. All I can provide are keys, what you do with them is up to you. If I provide you with a dogmatic answer as to what really is, it is like telling you how to ride a bike. It is nothing like actually riding a bike. You are not "wrong" with your presentation, since it is what you create. We create things with the tools and keys we pick up along the way. Regardless, have a happy Christmas. Sent laboriously from an iPhone, Mark On Dec 24, 2011, at 1:32 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Mark, > > By the way, the definition of self that I present includes both static > quality and Dynamic Quality. Are you proposing to convince me of something > else besides Quality(Dynamic/static)? I would like you to explain what that > might be. But, of course, you can confess that you do not know... > > > Marsha > > > > > Sent from my iPad > > On Dec 23, 2011, at 11:30 PM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Marsha, >> Yes I can dig it. You are much more than a collection of patterns. I can't >> convince you of that, I know. It will take somebody near and dear to you to >> do that. Ever tried a medium? >> >> All the best, you deserve it! >> >> Sent laboriously from an iPhone, >> Mark >> >> On Dec 22, 2011, at 10:42 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Mark, >>> >>> I believe that 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. >>> And I really dig that DQ. You can believe that. >>> >>> >>> Marsha >>> >>> >>> >>> On Dec 23, 2011, at 1:19 AM, 118 wrote: >>> >>>> Marsha, the opposite of a pattern is you. Believe in yourself. >>>> >>>> Sent laboriously from an iPhone, >>>> Mark >>>> >>>> On Dec 22, 2011, at 7:37 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Tuukka, >>>>> >>>>> Unfortunately, I do not understand what you are presenting. I do not >>>>> have a familiarity with the terms as you are using them. I understand we >>>>> all might find different aspects of the MoQ important, and may approach >>>>> that interest from different points-of-view. Broadly, I tend to want to >>>>> consider a pattern from a position of its opposite. That allows for the >>>>> widest range of possibilities for individual instances and the most >>>>> dynamic point-of-view. But that's just my opinion. Bottomline, for me, >>>>> is that Reality = Experience(patterned experience/unpatterned >>>>> experience). I think to categorize patterns into the four-level, >>>>> evolutionary, hierarchical structure: inorganic, biological, social and >>>>> intellectual is brilliant, rational, modern, and suggests a way to bridge >>>>> Western science with Eastern wisdom. But this is only my own >>>>> perspective. >>>>> >>>>> But that's enough of me repeating my point-of-view once again, to the >>>>> point of ad nauseam some would say. Hopefully as you continue to present >>>>> your point-of-view it wll become bstter understood. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > 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
