Sorry for being too static. On 22/06/2013, at 5:03 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Jun 21, 2013, at 10:14 PM, David Harding <[email protected]> wrote: > >> [Marsha] >> "That sounds quite definitive, quite fixed." >> >> [David] >> Yes, Marsha doesn't like fixed and definitive statements. Especially when >> static patterns are 'ever-changing'. Right Marsha? >> >> [Marsha] >> http://cosmicplay.net/Cosmic/Cosmoq/cosmiclila1.html >> >> [David quotes the link] >> "She completely deludes most people and is a magician, a trickster, and >> hides behind a show of magic and pretence, sometimes adopting the form of >> other deities. Like the other gods, She is ambiguous by nature and is on >> par with Vishnu or Shiva and may even be more powerful." >> >> [David] >> What a great way to be on a philosophy forum! Ambiguous and hiding behind a >> show of magic and pretence. That sounds a lot like you're destroying the >> *intellectual* values of clarity and honesty by valuing ambiguity and >> pretence... >> >> The 'Cosmic' Lila described here, like the Lila in the book clearly do not >> value ' staticness'. To them static is evil. They all follow another kind >> of good which is completely different to static good.. >> >> "Dynamic Quality is the pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality, the source >> of all things, completely simple and always new. It was the moral force that >> had motivated the brujo in Zuni. It contains no pattern of fixed rewards and >> punishments. Its only perceived good is freedom and its only perceived evil >> is static quality itself - any pattern of one-sided fixed values that tries >> to contain and kill the ongoing free force of life." >> >> "Lila's problem wasn't that she was suffering from lack of Dynamic freedom. >> It's hard to see how she could possibly have any more freedom." >> >> This Dynamic Quality - good and evil - is supported by the Code of Art in >> the MOQ. Dynamic Quality is higher than the intellectual level in the MOQ. >> >> *But* as RMP points out - >> >> "This last, the Dynamic-static code, says what's good in life isn't defined >> by society or intellect or biology. What's good is freedom from domination >> by any static pattern, but that freedom doesn't have to be obtained by the >> destruction of the patterns themselves." >> >> Do you know how freedom can be obtained without destroying the patterns as >> you do by being ambiguous and assuming pretense? >> > > > > Do you think it has anything to do with me? It doesn't. It is rather than > the inaptitude of your own position in trying to be an intellectual when you > grow up. You have nothing important to say so you post "quotes" and whine > about Lucy. I was commenting on the link you provided? My apologies for being too static for your liking. 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
