Mark,

John was complaining about the "less useful".  Perhaps "less useful" if one 
were relying on their being an independent, unchanging, permanent truth or 
knowledge.  That's why I suggested "less useful" being relative.  -  I never 
suggested that "not other" was an end, so I am sure why you needed to remind me.


Marsha




On Mar 25, 2012, at 11:33 AM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Marsha,
> It seems that the quotes you present point to exactly what John is saying.  
> Through Guenthers's own postulations he is pointing beyond such such 
> deductive verification.  Words are fingers pointing, that is what makes them 
> useful.  We do not look at the fingers themselves but where they are 
> directing our attention.  That could well be the unity of Quality, but also 
> beyond that.  Your "not other" is not an end, but just another step.  Keep 
> trucking'!  No pressure tho'.
> 
> Sent laboriously from an iPhone,
> Mark
> 
> On Mar 25, 2012, at 12:42 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Greetings John,
>> 
>> "This is supported by Herbert Guenther 204 (1957, p.144) who adds: 
>> 
>>    Experience is the central theme of Buddhism, not theoretical postulation 
>> and 
>>    deductive verification. Since no experience occurs more than once and all 
>>    repeated experiences actually are only analogous occurrences, it follows 
>> that 
>>    a thing or material substance can only be said to be a series of events 
>> interpreted 
>>    as a thing, having no more substantiality than any other series of events 
>> we may 
>>    arbitrarily single out. 
>> 
>> "After some thought, I think Guenther’s comment is valid as I can’t think of 
>> any events that are repeated exactly. Moreover, like the concept of ‘self’, 
>> there’s no absolute objective rule to judge when one event starts and 
>> another stops. This means that any concept or term is fundamentally 
>> indeterminate, imprecise and, as time passes, increasingly less useful."
>>      (MoQ Textbook)  
>> 
>> Marsha:
>> "Since no experience occurs more than once", and not repeated exactly, then 
>> experience is ever-changing.  This means, as Anthony recognizes, that "any 
>> concept or term", or any value pattern (I suggest), is fundamentally [that's 
>> FUNDAMENTALLY] indeterminate (DQ).  This is also stated as:
>> 
>> 
>> "In addition to the Dynamic Quality viewpoint of the MOQ corresponding to 
>> what Nagarjuna terms sunyata (i.e. the indeterminate or the world of 
>> Buddhas), the static quality viewpoint of the MOQ also corresponds to 
>> sunyavada (i.e. the conditioned component or world of maya) of Nagarjuna. 
>> Sunyavada includes all conceptions of reality including metaphysical views, 
>> ideals, religious beliefs, hopes and ambitions; in other words, using MOQ 
>> terminology, static quality patterns. 
>> 
>> 
>> "Moreover, Nagarjuna (1966, p.251) shares Pirsig’s perception that the 
>> indeterminate (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.
>> 
>> "Nagarjuna and Pirsig also have a similar recognition of two types of truth; 
>> the ‘static’ conventional truth (sammuti-sacca) and the ‘Dynamic’ ultimate 
>> truth (paramattha- sacca)."
>>      (MoQ Textbook)  
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha:
>> Static quality is not other than Dynamic Quality. 
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 24, 2012, at 4:34 PM, John Carl <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Marsha,
>>> 
>>> First off,
>>> 
>>> "Less useful" is not synonymous with "useless".  I agree completely, of
>>> course.  But my point remains.  While "less useful" is not the same as
>>> useless, it sure is antonymous with "more useful" and that is my claim.
>>> That it is precisely linguistic conceptualization's tendency to overgrow
>>> it's boundaries (or to jump a level!) that makes it so precious, so
>>> important and makes humans so much more than mere machines.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 3:43 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Hi John,
>>>> 
>>>> Not sure what your problem might be, and not sure that I have any dominion
>>>> over what you find problematic.  I'm pretty much at ease with
>>>> indeterminate, and depend on the provisional (static) like most everybody
>>>> else.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> Dominion?    Like I could be dominated, Hah!  Or you for that matter.  We
>>> share that much in common at least.  What resonates with me is the Ellul
>>> quote I provided some long time ago in the past, that it is precisely
>>> language's ambiguities and misunderstandings which make it MORE useful
>>> rather than less, cojoined with C.S. Peirce's idea of language as a sign,
>>> and not a discrete "thing".  That's the baggage I carry which makes
>>> Pirsig's scientific bent, as revealed in the quote, problematic for me.
>>> 
>>> Take care,
>>> 
>>> Me.
>>> 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

Reply via email to