Hi Marsha, >> So you do not find the truths of philosophy 'valid'? Why is it so >> important, heaven forbid, that the word truth is qualified by the words >> conventional or provisional? > > Well, it certainly is not in the words 'conventional' and 'provisional'; it's > the realization that our experiencing is co-dependent (relative), impermanent > and ever-changing - fleeting.
Okayy.. So truth changes how as a result of this? >>> The Ultimate Truth, which might be what interests me, is best approached by >>> discovering what is false; not this, not that; or so this is how I have >>> come to understand and experience it. >> >> So other truths apart from the 'Ultimate Truth' does not interest you? > > The word 'truth' does not interest me. I like the idea of 'patterns' so much > more. Why do you dislike the word 'truth' so much? Are there truths which you do not like? Is there something in your past which you do not want to face and so are avoiding it philosophically by claiming that 'truth' does not exist? A truth is an intellectual pattern. Some are good some are bad but truth is very important. It is a matter of life and death. Some truths save lives. Like the truth that you should put your seatbelt on when you go driving... >> So if I were to take your viewpoint. And take that objects of knowledge and >> static patterns are as you say - 'hypothetical'. Would it help the victims >> families of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima to tell them not to worry, the >> bombs were only 'hypothetical'? > > No, it wouldn't help the victims of the bombs dropped by the U.S.A. onto > Japan. Claiming that it is true that these things did happen, on the other hand, does help the victims. It means that they can begin to accept that it is true that these things have happened and move on.. Pretending that they were hypothetical is delusional and doesn't help. >> That makes me sick to the stomach. What shrewd, uncaring, new age mumbo >> jumbo. > > Your being "sick" and name calling doesn't help much either; it may be just > adding more pollution. I find holding patterns as hypothetical may be a good > way to honor all life as continuous. But life isn't continuous Marsha. That's my point. One day you and I and everyone else who is alive is going to die. That's true and not 'hypothetical'. >> There are facts of life Marsha. And no, they're not hypothetical. One of >> those facts of life, is that you and I and everyone on this planet is going >> to die. This isn't some joke. It's very sad and something very real when >> someone's time comes before it should. This is why there is more to life >> than just your 'Ultimate Truth'. There are important things and truths in >> life which people are concerned with which aren't the 'Ultimate Truth'. A >> way of determining those truths is by dialectically questioning someone, and >> forcing them to explain - on demand. > > There is value/experience; understanding that is more useful than some > cliche. And I do not dictate what everyone else should be doing or thinking. > There are times in our lives when family and community may be more > important, but I think compassion is a gift of the Ultimate Truth, even we > only experience it as fleeting. Everything is a 'gift' of the ultimate truth. Saying that is like saying the sun will rise tomorrow. So what? We are alive and there are facts of life which are true. We cannot wish those facts of life away just by pretending they are 'incomplete' or 'co-dependent'. >>>> Yeah good, valuable, moral, right - they're all the same thing to me… >>> >>> Maybe a serial killer would agree with you. >> >> I hardly see how what I wrote would be something a serial killer would say. >> If you could explain yourself with some reasoning so that I can >> intellectually understand where you are coming from then maybe I can respond >> in more detail so that we can get to the truth of the matter. > > I am not sure there is a rational way to present an explanation. Being that I value intellect and metaphysics I think you can explain everything except Dynamic Quality. But even DQ we have given it a name and called it as such.. > Think back to your presenting a family tragedy and the bombing of Hiroshima. > On what level can they be "good, valuable, moral, right"? The bombing of Japan had a certain rightness to it to those who ordered the bombings. While we disagree about our descriptions of what is right, it is our descriptions which differ and not the rightness itself. > Such a paradox was why Phædrus left the University in India, was it not? No it wasn't and this points to what appears to be your misreading on ZMM. The whole point of why Phædrus left India was that they were claiming what you are claiming now. That the bombs were 'illusory'.. "But one day in the classroom, the professor of philosophy was blindly expounding on the illusory nature of the world for what seemed like the fiftieth time and Phaedrus raised his hand and asked coldly if it was believed that the atomic bombs that had been dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were illusory. The professor smiled ans said yes. That was the end of the exchange. Within the traditions of Indian philosophy that answer may have been correct, but for Phaedrus and for anyone else who reads newspapers regularly and is concerned with such things as mass destruction of human beings that answer was hopelessly inadequate. He left the classroom, left India and gave up." > It is a most difficult challenge to understanding, and I believe the path to > opening one's heart. I did try to bring up the Buddhist conception of the > Two-Truths, but those too are just words. And I only make others angry if I > say the fundamental nature of static quality is Dynamic Quality. It sounds > insane to say it is suffering and, at the same time, it is good, valuable, > moral and right. But that's the way it is, or seems to be to me. Yes static quality is suffering and good, valuable, moral and right. Static quality does come from Dynamic Quality. But it is not Dynamic Quality. They are two very different Qualities. One is interested in particulars, while the other is no thing at all. -David 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
