Yes, I've sent him a copy but I don't know if he is reading it. I sure'd like to hear his view on it. Ant liked it and a few others. Many of them are from India, could you imagine that? My brother is still waiting for borrowing his wife's iphone. What makes you more confident about his opinion than your own?
J A 3 nov 2012 kl. 12.10 skrev MarshaV: > > > Jan-Anders, > > A while back you told me that RMP was reading MALC. Has he written a review > for your book? If not I think I'll wait until he does before I take you and > RMP to be of one mind concerning the MoQ. > > > Marsha > > > > On Nov 3, 2012, at 6:24 AM, Jan Anders Andersson wrote: > >> Dear Marsha >> >> After you've read my book twice you'd know that I would never adopt that >> position. I, however, insist that you read and try to better understand me, >> dmb or RMP. It's not dangerous, it's dynamic, and maybe fruitful also. >> >> Static patterns are real, and by that, patterns are a Part of the reality. >> MOQ is a concept, a pattern and by that real, a Part of the Big Reality, but >> it is not The Reality. You've got self-confidence, but that picture of your >> self in your own mind-mirror is not the real you. Still it is an important >> part of your reality. >> >> This is what RMP tells in Ch 32. Static patterns are contours, remnants of >> Dynamic patterns. We never know the "goodness" of a dog completely, but we >> can feel the smell of it. Patterns are carrying Value, the messenger of the >> message, means for experience. I hope you see the message here. I showed you >> that it is three-dimensional. The time and effort you put on MD(1), the >> spotted series of characters and words(2) that carries the Carmic Garbage, >> you know that you are free to like it or not(3). >> >> We don't have to throw away static values to be able to experience the >> dynamic side of the reality. Calling all patterns hypothetical is pathetical >> overkill to me. I don't find it useful at all. Andre's "la-di-da" is just >> perfect in that case. >> >> If you read the complete ch 32 careful, it is quite clear what RMP means >> with Carmic Garbage Static Patterns vs Dynamic Quality. He doesn't say >> "leave Static Quality in favour of Dynamic Quality". He just point at that >> there are two sides of the coin. (And that the coin has a value stamped on >> both sides of it.) >> >> Now let's be more serious: >> How could you tell a joke and make people laugh without using static, >> socially common generalized, patterns? >> >> A native woman from the Kalahari desert was asked about what kind of sex >> position she liked best? >> >> "Well, I think its best when he stands behind me while I'm whatching out of >> the window for my husband." >> >> "La di da?" >> >> Jan Anders >> >> 3 nov 2012 kl. 05.11 skrev MarshaV: >> >>> >>> >>> Jan-Anders, >>> >>> It would be grossly delusional if I mistook my words and concepts to be >>> certain and complete. That is why I prefer to think of static (patterned) >>> value, objects of knowledge, as hypothetical (supposed but not necessarily >>> real or true.) Once one accepts the MoQ's fundamental principal that the >>> world is nothing but Value, then 'expanded rationality' occurs when an >>> individual transforms the natural tendency to reify self and world into the >>> natural tendency to hold all static patterns of value to be hypothetical >>> (supposed but not necessarily real or true.) By using 'hypothetical' I >>> think there is less of a tendency toward intellectual arrogance. >>> Understanding static (patterned) value as hypothetical acknowledges the >>> incompleteness of what we know and makes room for additional inquiry with >>> new possibilities; it promotes an attitude of fearless curiosity: gumption. >>> It moves one away from thinking of entities as existing inherently and >>> independent of consciousness. But, I > >> am >>> not insisting, nor even suggesting, that you adopt my position >>> >>> Marsha >>> >>> >>> On Nov 2, 2012, at 4:02 PM, Jan Anders Andersson <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Marsha >>>> >>>> Does this mean that your writings and the words and concepts among other >>>> static and predictable patterns are unreal? >>>> >>>> Jan Anders >>>> >>> 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
