Hi Ant,

Be assured I will make an effort not to reference any of the Buddhist 
commentary from your Textbook or PhD dissertation again.  It's a shame though, 
I thought you and RMP offered some interesting insight.  


Marsha







On Feb 6, 2013, at 9:47 AM, Ant McWatt wrote:

> 
> Marsha,
> 
> Above all, it's clarity of thought that I'm after here so you'll need to put 
> that quote from David Buchanan in context.  (Though, as it stands, it still 
> sounds to me like the static perspective of the everyday world as provided in 
> LILA).
> 
> As with Keef (now you should see the type of tea he has - it has a kick to 
> it, let's say) who shares my sympathy towards Anglo-American philosophers and 
> philosophologists (the devils who need to be thrown out of these ivory 
> towers), I have sympathy both with the Dynamic viewpoint you tend to take in 
> the conversations here and the static viewpoint that David takes.  I have to 
> have sympathy with both of you as you're both excellent hosts!  ;-)
> 
> Seriously, as you implied in your last response to me in the "self" thread 
> yesterday, both perspectives are useful in the right context.  I just have a 
> feeling (feeling? is that the best term to use here; probably not) that the 
> static viewpoint is the default one in LILA and so should be the default one 
> here.  It's MOQ Discuss; not Mystic Discuss.  If you want to use the Dynamic 
> viewpoint, the Tetralemma (Paul Turner's adopted "baby") or whatever esoteric 
> perpective that Scott Roberts was going on about years ago (if I sound too 
> dismissive of the latter - I shouldn't be because it IS worth at least being 
> aware of these various perspectives), these viewpoints should be qualified 
> before use.  It help keeps that little intellect of mine clear about what's 
> going on; which metaphorical trees are where and in which metaphysical or 
> mystical forest.  
> 
> To use another metaphor, see it as set of three or four paintings that are 
> about the same subject (like that absolutely lovely painting you gave me of 
> Bob derived from that photo of him as a three year old) but painted in three 
> or four different styles; e.g. think of how Van Gogh, Picasso, Joseph Turner 
> and Monet would have each made of that same photograph (when they were on top 
> of their game).  MOQ Discuss is a gallery devoted to one style, it just helps 
> visitors see what is going on if "special exhibitions" are clearly marked as 
> such. 
> 
> Anyway, that's enough preaching.  As an apology for using his name in vain 
> here (which, of course is a public forum), I'll send Keef some of that Golden 
> Monkey tea you like though he'll probably end up smoking it...
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Anthony
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> From: [email protected]
>> Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 05:00:19 -0500
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [MD] Sympathy for the Devil
>> 
>> 
>> Hi Ant,
>> 
>> On Feb 5, 2013, at 4:23 PM, Ant McWatt <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> So, what I'm trying to do here (rather badly it seems) is to clarify these 
>>> two perspectives.   From what I was reading in this thread - and 
>>> elsewhere - David Buchanan takes the conventional static perspective of the 
>>> MOQ (as laid out in LILA) while Marsha tends to take a Dynamic 
>>> "World of Buddhas" perspective.  As I said above, by not qualifying the 
>>> latter perspective, it confuses things and results in people 
>>> talking over each other; sometimes even being a little rude and frustrated.
>> 
>> Hmmmm.   
>> 
>> "I conclude by making a case that James and Pirsig are offering an 
>> empirically based form of philosophical mysticism that is comparable to a 
>> non-theistic religion like Buddhism." 
>>       (dmb)
>> 
>> 
>> Really?  
>> 
>> 
>> 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

Reply via email to