WARNING!! This post may bother some of those who are faint of intellect. Hi Marsha, For me, it is a matter of how one looks at something. Understanding should be expansive and not confining. Once we place value on a certain manner of looking at existence, we detract from it. This is, of course, the nature of SQ. I like your idea of holding a dynamic and a static position at the same time. The effort could be made in balancing these two in the "best" way. That is not insanity, that is just practicality.
I have not read Paul Turner, but given the support he is getting from some misguided participants in this forum, I am sure I would see it as "quite wrong". Perhaps it is the same old clever twisting of logic, perhaps not. Maybe it is from a spiritual rational point of view. However, I do not see much of that in this forum, so probably not. I don't think anyone even knows what that means (except Pirsig, of course). Hope he doesn't get his knickers in a twist. All my humble opinion, of course, which is based on no real reason. It is just a hunch :-) Cheers, Mark On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:40 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Mark, > > Gee, I've been thinking of considering 'hypothetical' an analogy, an analogy > all the way down: not this, not that! BUT maybe this is to hold a Dynamic > position and a static position at the same time - to be i-n-s-a-n-e. OR > maybe Paul Turner will offer a better explanation through his two-thesis > position. I like my two-ways of looking at static (patterned) value, but I > am very open to 'considering' what PT has to offer. > > > Cheerfully yours, > > Marsha > > > > > On Aug 22, 2012, at 10:06 AM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Marsha, >> I fully understand. As a scientist I also treat everything as hypothetical. >> That is the scientific method. I interpret what I envision in the most >> useful manner knowing that interpretations always change. >> >> My suggestion was to hold your hypothetical as hypothetical. You will not >> always consider your view as hypothetical. It is the most useful to you >> right now. This too shall pass. >> >> Enjoy your hypothetical, it will get you beyond it. There is nothing I can >> tell you, you need to create it on your own. Just treat what I write as >> hypothetical, if that works for you. >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> Mark >> >> On Aug 21, 2012, at 10:51 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Mark, >>> >>> I am not insisting, nor even suggesting, that you, or David, adopt my >>> position, but I find holding patterns as hypothetical is conducive to an >>> open, inquiring mind. >>> >>> >>> Marsha >>> >>> >>> >>> On Aug 21, 2012, at 9:54 AM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Marsha, >>>> I am glad you find freedom in uncertainty. "Holding patterns as >>>> hypothetical" AS hypothetical, suggests that you can move away from >>>> that form of understanding. The way to move away would be to NOT hold >>>> patterns as hypothetical. However, there is an alternative as >>>> presented in my second paragraph. At the root of your statement is >>>> the indication that a degree of uncertainty is necessary to progress. >>>> However, even uncertainty would become hypothetical bringing in the >>>> possibility of certainty. While this idea may seem like a paradox >>>> (which it is), it can be very revealing upon contemplation. >>>> >>>> By questioning the very basis of your knowledge, you imply that there >>>> is the "non-hypothetical". This would follow since "the hypothetical" >>>> suggests that there is the "non-hypothetical" (in order for the terms >>>> "hypothetical" to mean something). Where you then find yourself is >>>> interesting and can become a basis for an appreciation of existence. >>>> By your technique, one can turn away from the idea of coming in >>>> contact with such "non-hypothetical", and turn instead to the >>>> "creative notion" of existence. This would entail surmising that >>>> there is no "non-hypothetical" and instead the appreciation of >>>> existence as creative. When we create a painting, it replaces the >>>> "nothing" that was once there. The same can be said for each moment >>>> of existence. Quality "seeps through" in every instant resulting in >>>> an entirely "new thing" at each moment. >>>> >>>> Pondering on existence in this fashion can also bring about great >>>> freedom. It also places a degree of personal responsibility on what >>>> one creates at every moment. Since most of one's existence is without >>>> forethought, one then can "realize" that one is"tapping into" a much >>>> deeper region of one's ability. This region can be denoted as DQ. >>>> That we "realize things does not mean that we come in contact with >>>> something that we have found, but that we have created it. This would >>>> bring in the idealist notion of "the world as idea". >>>> >>>> Hope this makes sense, but probably not. At least I tried. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> 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
