J-A, Save the Robert DeNiro impersonation...
Metaphysics is the investigation into the nature of reality. The Metaphysics of Quality has as its fundamental principle the idea that the world is nothing but value. Marsha On Feb 3, 2013, at 4:20 AM, Jan-Anders Andersson <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Marsha > > Who do you look at in the mirror? Some One else? > > I am talking to You. > > Being someone can be a pleasure or a suffering inferno, it all depends on how > well we learn how to do it. By excellence or without balance. > > MOQ is about things, living organisms, social group identities and paradigms. > They all have a dynamic (time related) and a static (almost permanent) > quality side. > > The whole thing is "to be", or not to be. > > There is always something out there that is - phantastic. You'll see it if > you look for it. > > JanAnders > > 3 feb 2013 kl. 09:17 skrev MarshaV <[email protected]>: > >> >> Greetings, >> >> >> A Buddhist perspective of self: No central unit, but a flow of mental >> states which rise, produce function and disappear, which gives rise to the >> next mental state producing a stream of mental states. >> >> >> In Buddhism there is the term 'anatta', no-self: >> >> One cannot say that the self (I) exists. >> One cannot say that the self (I) does not exist. >> One cannot say that self (I) both exists and does not exist. >> One cannot say that the self (I) neither exists nor does not exist. >> >> >> >> Some MoQ quotes: >> >> "An example of sammuti-sacca [conventional (relative) truth, or static >> quality] is the concept of self. Pirsig follows the Buddha’s teachings about >> the ‘self’ which doesn’t recognise that it has any real existence and that >> only ‘nothingness’ (i.e. Dynamic Quality) is thought to be real. According >> to Rahula, the Buddha taught that a clinging to the self as real is the >> primary cause of dukkha (which is usually translated as ‘suffering’). >> Having said this, Rahula (1959, p.55) makes it very clear that it’s not >> incorrect to ‘use such expressions in our daily life as ‘I’, ‘you’, ‘being’, >> ‘individual’, etc’ as long as it is remembered that the self (like anything >> else conceptualised) is just a useful convention." >> (McWatt, MoQ Textbook) >> >> >> "This fictitious 'man' has many synonyms; 'mankind,' 'people,' 'the public,' >> and even such pronouns as 'I,' 'he,' and 'they.' Our language is so >> organized around them and they are so convenient to use it is impossible to >> get rid of them. There is really no need to. Like 'substance' they can be >> used as long as it is remembered that they're terms for collections of >> patterns and not some independent primary reality of their own." >> (LILA, Chapter 12) >> >> >> "This Cartesian 'Me,' this autonomous little homunculus who sits behind our >> eyeballs looking out through them in order to pass judgment on the affairs >> of the world, is just completely ridiculous. This self-appointed little >> editor of reality is just an impossible fiction that collapses the moment >> one examines it. This Cartesian 'Me' is a software reality, not a hardware >> reality. This body on the left and this body on the right are running >> variations of the same program, the same 'Me,' which doesn't belong to >> either of them. The 'Me's' are simply a program format. >> >> "Talk about aliens from another planet. This program based on 'Me's' and >> 'We's' is the alien. 'We' has only been here for a few thousand years or so. >> But these bodies that 'We' has taken over were around for ten times that >> long before 'We' came along. And the cells - my God, the cells have been >> around for thousands of times that long." >> (LILA, Chapter 15) >> >> >> “The MOQ, as I understand it, denies any existence of a “self” that is >> independent of inorganic, biological, social or intellectual patterns. There >> is no “self” that contains these patterns. These patterns contain the self. >> This denial agrees with both religious mysticism and scientific knowledge. >> In Zen, there is reference to “big self” and “small self.” Small self is the >> patterns. Big self is Dynamic Quality." >> (RMP, Lila’s Child, Annotation 29) >> >> >> "It's important to remember that both science and Eastern religions regard >> "the individual" as an empty concept. It is literally a figure of speech. If >> you start assigning concrete reality to it, you will find yourself in a >> philosophic quandary". >> (RMP, Lila’s Child, Annotattion 77) >> >> >> "The MOQ, like the Buddhists and the Determinists (odd bedfellows) says this >> “autonomous individual” is an illusion." >> (RMP, Copleston) >> >> >> >> Marsha >> >> >> 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
